Former Vice President Atiku Abubakar has demanded an explanation for President Bola Tinubu’s third consecutive absence from the United Nations General Assembly, questioning whether his past legal history in the United States has affected Nigeria’s diplomacy.
Atiku, in a statement issued on Sunday by his Senior Special Assistant on Public Communication, Phrank Shaibu, said Tinubu skipped the 79th UNGA in 2024, the 80th in 2025 and the 81st in 2026, leaving Vice President Kashim Shettima to represent Nigeria.
He said the repeated absences had become a pattern that required an explanation rather than a routine presidential delegation.
Atiku questions Tinubu’s UNGA absence
Atiku described the UN General Assembly as one of the world’s most important diplomatic gatherings, bringing together representatives of the UN’s 193 member states.
He said the meeting gives presidents and prime ministers opportunities to defend national interests, negotiate partnerships and shape global decisions on trade, security and development.
“Vice President Shettima may represent Nigeria capably, but representation by delegation cannot permanently substitute for the personal authority, visibility and responsibility of the President,” Atiku said.
He argued that presidential attendance at UNGA goes beyond ceremonies, as leaders use the event and its sidelines to hold bilateral meetings, attract investors, negotiate trade deals and mobilise development finance.
Atiku said Nigeria could lose opportunities when its president repeatedly stays away from the global diplomatic gathering.
He also linked investment, capital inflows and the naira to the broader economic consequences he attributed to Tinubu’s absence.
“The cost is eventually transferred to ordinary citizens,” he said, arguing that fewer investments could mean fewer businesses and jobs, while reduced capital inflows could put additional pressure on the naira.
Atiku questions $9m US lobbying spending
Atiku also questioned reports that Nigeria’s Permanent Representative to the UN, Jimoh Ibrahim, secured a seat for Tinubu close to where United States President Donald Trump would sit.
“The seat was secured, but the President disappeared,” Atiku said.
He questioned why Nigeria would secure what he described as a strategic seat for Tinubu if the President did not intend to attend the event personally.
Atiku also raised questions about the reported expenditure of up to $9 million on American lobbyists by the Tinubu administration.
“What exactly did Nigerians purchase with that money?” he asked, questioning why Nigeria would spend millions of dollars on lobbying in Washington while Tinubu repeatedly stayed away from UNGA in New York.
Atiku then linked Tinubu’s absence to his documented legal history in the United States, while stressing that he was not claiming that the President faced a legal ban from entering the country.
Atiku cites US forfeiture case
Atiku referred to Case No. 93 C 4483 before the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois.
He said the US government had instituted forfeiture proceedings involving funds held in accounts connected to Bola Tinubu and associated companies.
According to Atiku, the complaint alleged that the funds represented proceeds linked to narcotics trafficking and money laundering.
He also cited a sworn affidavit by an Internal Revenue Service criminal-investigation agent and said the proceedings eventually resulted in the forfeiture of about $460,000 to the US government.
“ We are not asserting that Tinubu is legally prohibited from entering the United States. The Presidency has announced no such restriction,” Atiku said.
He questioned whether the President’s US legal history had influenced his decision to stay away from UNGA since 2024.
“Is he afraid of renewed scrutiny? Is he uncomfortable appearing on American soil amid continuing public interest in the narcotics drug related forfeiture proceedings?” he asked.
Atiku demands explanation from Presidency
Atiku also criticised what he described as a contrast between Tinubu’s domestic political image and his absence from major international forums.
He cited Nigeria’s regional military involvement and argued that the country should also project its voice strongly through diplomatic platforms such as the UN.
He further questioned whether Tinubu was free to travel to the United States and demanded that the Presidency explain the reason for his repeated UNGA absence.
“If there is no impediment, the Presidency must explain this serial absenteeism. If an impediment exists, Nigerians have a right to know,” Atiku said.
He insisted that Nigeria’s diplomatic and economic interests should remain separate from Tinubu’s personal history.
“Nigeria is bigger than Bola. Our diplomatic influence, economic interests and international reputation must not be subordinated to Tinubu’s American baggage,” he said.
Atiku ended by demanding an explanation for why Tinubu did not occupy the reported seat near Trump at the 2026 UN General Assembly.
“What exactly are you afraid of in America?” he asked.
