The Nigerians in Diaspora Monitoring Group (NDMG), USA Chapter, has accused African Democratic Congress (ADC) presidential candidate, Atiku Abubakar, and his associates of turning domestic political rivalry into an international embarrassment for Nigeria.
This online medium reports that the President of the NDMG USA Chapter, Daniel Cosmas, in an e-statement issued on Sunday, slammed Atiku for attempting to use a Washington lobbying campaign against President Bola Tinubu.
The group said the renewed campaign over decades-old United States documents concerning Tinubu was a desperate attempt to influence foreign officials against Nigeria’s elected president ahead of the 2027 elections.
NDMG noted that the documents being circulated had also been deliberately misrepresented, stressing that the 1993 proceedings frequently cited in the campaign were a civil forfeiture case, not a criminal prosecution or conviction against Tinubu.
According to the group, there are concerns that the allegations were being pushed through a lobbying firm whose activities raised serious questions about the credibility and motives of those behind the campaign.
NDMG further accused Atiku’s camp of attempting to manufacture an international crisis around Tinubu rather than making its case directly to Nigerian voters.
The group said opposition politicians were entitled to challenge the President and scrutinise his record, but should not seek to enlist foreign governments in domestic political contests.
The group warned that such campaigns could have consequences beyond the political fortunes of Tinubu or Atiku, particularly for Nigerians living and working in the United States and other countries, adding that the former Vice President should concentrate on telling Nigerians his manifestos.
The statement read, “The attempt to sell an old civil forfeiture proceeding as though it were a criminal conviction is a cynical distortion of history. There is a fundamental difference between a civil proceeding involving the forfeiture of money and a criminal conviction for drug trafficking. Those who understand the American legal system know this distinction, yet political operators appear determined to blur it for propaganda purposes.
“It is astonishing that people who claim to be defending Nigeria’s interests would outsource their campaign to a lobbyist whose own character and background have become subjects of public scrutiny. The irony is even greater when the person leading this campaign has been identified as being of Nigerian origin. Nigerians should ask why someone with such a controversial profile has suddenly assumed the role of an authority on the Nigerian presidency and why Atiku’s camp is comfortable placing its political messaging in his hands.
“Democracy gives Atiku every right to oppose President Tinubu, criticise his policies and seek the support of Nigerians in 2027. What democracy does not give anyone is the right to outsource Nigeria’s political contest to Washington. If the opposition has a case against Tinubu, it should present that case to Nigerians and, where appropriate, to the Nigerian courts. Lobbying American officials with recycled allegations does not make those allegations true.
“Those pushing this campaign should remember that they will not be the only Nigerians answering questions when our country’s reputation is dragged through the mud. There are millions of Nigerians abroad building careers, businesses and families. Their dignity should not become collateral damage in an opposition politician’s presidential ambition.
“President Tinubu will be judged by Nigerians on his record. Atiku should tell Nigerians what he intends to do differently and allow the people to decide. No lobbyist in Washington should be permitted to determine the direction of Nigeria’s democracy.”
