By Oscar Okhifo
Former Vice-President Atiku Abubakar’s challenge to anyone with credible evidence of corruption against him to come forward has come under renewed scrutiny following the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission’s (EFCC) decision to reopen an investigation into allegations dating back to 2006.
Atiku has consistently denied wrongdoing, insisting that the allegations were previously examined by several institutions without resulting in a criminal conviction against him. He has also challenged his accusers to present any credible evidence against him.
The renewed probe follows a petition by former member of the House of Representatives, Ehiozuwa Johnson Agbonayinma, seeking a review of the allegations and possible prosecution of the former vice-president.
Agbonayinma appeared at the EFCC headquarters in Jabi, Abuja, on October 12, where he adopted his petition and answered questions from investigators.
The petition, dated August 27, 2026, and received by the commission on September 1, was submitted through his lawyer, Chief Hannibal Egbe Uwaifo, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN).
It seeks a review of the EFCC’s September 2006 report on Atiku and a February 4, 2010, report by the United States Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations.
According to reports, the EFCC acknowledged receipt of the petition and confirmed that an investigation had commenced.
Speaking after his engagement with investigators, Agbonayinma said the matter should not be allowed to remain unresolved.
“I want to thank Nigerians, the EFCC and those praying for me in this struggle. The laws are meant for both the rich and the poor. After the EFCC has done a fantastic job, it should not be kept under the table,” he said.
The former lawmaker alleged that the EFCC had previously indicated that Atiku could face prosecution after leaving office as vice-president, when the constitutional immunity applicable to him in that capacity ceased to apply.
He said a review of the earlier reports would demonstrate the commission’s commitment to accountability, particularly in cases involving politically influential individuals.
Atiku Challenges Accusers
Atiku, however, has questioned the basis for reopening the matter, maintaining that the allegations had previously been examined by the EFCC, an administrative panel, the National Assembly and the courts.
In a statement issued in September through his Senior Special Assistant on Public Communication, Phrank Shaibu, the former vice-president rejected suggestions that he had been shielded from investigation under former President Olusegun Obasanjo.
“Let us not rewrite history. The Obasanjo administration did not protect me. At the height of our political disagreement, these matters travelled through the EFCC, an administrative panel, the National Assembly and the courts.
“The machinery of the state was fully deployed, and the political hostility was public,” Atiku said.
“Yet no court convicted me on these allegations. That is the record,” he added.
He also questioned whether any new evidence had emerged to justify revisiting allegations that had been in the public domain for nearly two decades.
“So what exactly has been discovered in 2026 that Nigeria did not hear twenty years ago? A petition is not a conviction, an acknowledgement stamp is not evidence of guilt, and repetition cannot magically become a judgment of court,” he said.
Atiku challenged his accusers to produce credible evidence and allow the allegations to be tested through due process.
“Anyone with credible evidence against me should bring it out and test it before the law,” he said.
“I have issued that challenge before, and I repeat it today without hesitation.”
The former vice-president also accused supporters of President Bola Tinubu’s administration of recycling old allegations to divert public attention from economic hardship and the government’s performance.
However, the claim that the renewed investigation is politically motivated has not been independently established.
Evidence and Due Process
The renewed probe raises questions about what the EFCC’s earlier report established, whether fresh evidence has emerged and whether the available material warrants further legal action.
While Agbonayinma is seeking prosecution, Atiku maintains that the allegations were examined in the past without resulting in a conviction against him.
The distinction is crucial: reopening an investigation does not establish criminal wrongdoing, just as a denial of allegations does not prevent law enforcement authorities from examining them.
The EFCC is expected to assess the available evidence and determine whether further action is warranted in accordance with the law.
The development comes amid intensifying political activities ahead of the 2027 general elections, with Atiku among the opposition figures positioning themselves for the contest.
Agbonayinma has also disclosed that he petitioned United States President Donald Trump over the allegations, seeking renewed attention to issues raised in the earlier investigations.
The renewed probe has brought Atiku’s longstanding challenge to his accusers back into focus. For the EFCC, however, the central question is whether the evidence justifies further action.
Ultimately, the outcome of the investigation, rather than the petition or the competing claims surrounding it, will determine whether the matter proceeds to formal charges.