Former Vice President Atiku Abubakar has demanded an explanation from President Bola Tinubu over his decision not to attend the 81st United Nations General Assembly in New York, questioning whether the President’s past controversies in the United States have become a burden on Nigeria’s foreign relations.
Tinubu has mandated Vice President Kashim Shettima to lead Nigeria’s delegation to the 81st UNGA, which begins its high-level General Debate on September 22. Shettima departed Nigeria on Sunday for New York.
In a statement issued on Sunday by his Senior Special Assistant on Public Communication, Phrank Shaibu, Atiku said Tinubu had also been absent from the 79th UNGA in 2024 and the 80th in 2025, with Shettima representing him on both occasions.
Atiku said the repeated absences required an explanation, arguing that UNGA provides heads of government with opportunities to hold bilateral meetings, pursue partnerships and advance their countries’ interests.
“The United Nations General Assembly is one of the world’s most important diplomatic gatherings. It brings together the representatives of the UN’s 193 member states and provides a unique platform for presidents and prime ministers to defend their countries’ interests, negotiate partnerships and shape global decisions on trade, security and development,” Atiku said.
“Vice President Shettima may represent Nigeria capably, but representation by delegation cannot permanently substitute for the personal authority, visibility and responsibility of the President.”
He added: “Tinubu cannot continue to treat Nigeria’s seat at the world’s biggest diplomatic table as though it were an inconvenient appointment that can be endlessly outsourced.”
Atiku also questioned the economic implications of the President’s absence, saying UNGA sidelines provide opportunities for leaders to engage investors, development partners and other governments.
“When a President makes himself absent from that stage for three consecutive years, his country loses opportunities,” he said.
“Investment does not follow silence. International capital does not pursue a country whose leader repeatedly abandons the room in which consequential economic relationships are being built.”
He further linked Tinubu’s absence to Nigeria’s reported $9 million engagement of a US lobbying firm.
Documents filed under the US Foreign Agents Registration Act show that the Federal Government, through Kaduna-based Aster Legal, retained Washington-based DCI Group in a deal valued at $9 million to help communicate Nigeria’s security efforts and maintain US support for counterterrorism efforts. Reports said the initial $4.5 million retainer was paid, with the arrangement structured at $750,000 per month.
Atiku said the spending raised questions about why the administration would invest heavily in improving Nigeria’s standing in Washington while the President repeatedly stayed away from the UNGA in New York.
“What exactly did Nigerians purchase with that money? Why spend millions of dollars lobbying Washington while Tinubu repeatedly stays away from New York?” he asked.
“Why hire lobbyists to speak for Nigeria in America when the Nigerian President cannot summon the courage to appear at the world’s biggest diplomatic gathering on American soil?”
Atiku also questioned an earlier statement by Nigeria’s Permanent Representative to the UN, Jimoh Ibrahim, that a seat had been secured for Tinubu “not too far from where the US President, Donald Trump, will be seated.”
“The seat was secured, but the President disappeared,” Atiku said.
“If proximity to President Trump was considered such a diplomatic achievement, why did Tinubu abandon the opportunity and send his deputy?”
He then raised questions about Tinubu’s history in the United States, referring to a 1993 forfeiture case in the US District Court for the Northern District of Illinois.
“The complaint stated that the funds represented proceeds of narcotics trafficking and money laundering,” Atiku said.
“A supporting sworn affidavit by an Internal Revenue Service criminal-investigation agent similarly stated that funds in accounts controlled by Bola Tinubu were connected to drug-trafficking proceeds. The proceedings eventually resulted in the forfeiture of approximately $460,000 to the United States government.”
Atiku acknowledged that there was no announced legal restriction preventing Tinubu from travelling to the United States, but questioned whether his past legal controversies had influenced his decision.
“We are not asserting that Tinubu is legally prohibited from entering the United States. The Presidency has announced no such restriction,” he said.
“But if no legal, diplomatic, medical or personal impediment exists, why has Tinubu repeatedly avoided the UNGA since 2024?”
He asked whether “one man’s personal history” had become a burden on Nigeria’s diplomatic engagement.
Atiku also criticised what he described as a contrast between Tinubu’s domestic political posture and his international engagements, saying Nigeria’s global standing should not be subordinated to the President’s personal circumstances.
“Nigeria is bigger than Bola. Our diplomatic influence, economic interests and international reputation must not be subordinated to Tinubu’s American baggage,” he said.
“After committing up to $9 million to American lobbyists, Nigerians deserve more than silence, evasions and another empty presidential seat at the United Nations.”
He demanded that the Presidency state whether Tinubu was free to travel to the United States and explain the reason for his third consecutive absence from the UNGA.
“If there is no impediment, the Presidency must explain this serial absenteeism. If an impediment exists, Nigerians have a right to know,” Atiku said.
The former vice president ended by directly questioning the President over the reported seat secured near Trump.
“Mr Bola, your seat was reportedly secured near President Donald Trump. Why did you refuse to occupy it?
“What exactly are you afraid of in America?” he asked.
(SaharaReporters)
