The Presidential Campaign Council of the African Democratic Congress (ADC) has challenged the All Progressives Congress (APC) to produce any court judgment convicting its presidential candidate, Atiku Abubakar, of corruption.
Gists9ja reports that the challenge followed comments by APC spokesman, Felix Morka, who had declared Atiku unfit to become Nigeria’s president over alleged past corruption-related cases.
In a statement on Friday, the Director of Strategic Communication of the ADC Campaign Council and Atiku’s spokesperson, Phrank Shaibu, accused Morka of presenting allegations against the former vice president as established facts.
Shaibu described Morka’s comments as a “grubby attempt to conduct a trial by insult,” insisting that the APC spokesman should produce a court judgment if one exists.
“Morka piles rumour upon insinuation, pronounces sentence in an APC press release and expects Nigerians to mistake his fury for evidence. He may shout like a prosecutor and posture like a judge, but he cannot manufacture a conviction.
“If he has a judgment against Atiku, let him produce it. If he does not, he should stop parading his allegations as the verdict of a court,” Shaibu said.
The ADC campaign council also argued that the APC’s allegations against Atiku failed to address economic concerns affecting Nigerians, including the rising cost of food, fuel, transportation and electricity.
Shaibu accused Morka of reducing the issue to a situation where allegations against Atiku were automatically treated as convictions.
“Morka has become an untutored spin doctor for a party caught in the conundrum of a sinking regime. Strip away the gutter language and his argument is simple: an allegation against Atiku must be treated as a conviction,” he said.
ADC Raises Questions Over Tinubu
The council also criticised Morka’s warning that Atiku should be kept away from Nigeria’s national treasury, citing allegations and legal proceedings involving President Bola Tinubu in the United States.
Shaibu referred to a US federal court affidavit relating to an investigation into alleged narcotics trafficking and financial transactions involving several individuals whose names, he claimed, appeared in records connected to Tinubu.
According to him, the affidavit contained references to financial transactions involving Tinubu and Adegboyega Mueez Akande.
Shaibu alleged that Akande introduced Tinubu to First Heritage Bank, after which an $80,000 transfer was made in a transaction linked to Akande.
He also referred to a $5,000 cashier’s cheque allegedly issued by Tinubu to Akande’s wife, Audrey, as well as corporate documents relating to Compass Finance, which he said listed Akande and Abiodun Agbele as directors.
“A bank introduction. A transfer. A cheque. A company. Tinubu should explain those transactions and why the same names kept appearing around his finances,” Shaibu said.
The ADC spokesperson further claimed that the affidavit contained banking records involving First Lady Oluremi Tinubu, alleging that she held a joint account with her husband and had previously held another joint account at the same bank with Audrey Akande.
Shaibu argued that the existence of such records warranted public questions and disclosure, while acknowledging that an investigation or allegation should not automatically be treated as a criminal conviction.
The council also cited a 2025 US federal court ruling which it said acknowledged Tinubu as a subject of an investigation involving the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA).
Shaibu called for the lawful disclosure of the relevant records.
“Morka’s colleagues will rush to tell Nigerians that a search result is not a conviction. Nobody has said it is.
“But that observation does not erase the court’s finding that Tinubu was a subject of an investigation. Nigerians deserve to know what the records say, what role he played in the events they describe, and why disclosure has been resisted,” he said.
ADC Defends Atiku Over Mambilla Case
The ADC campaign council also responded to Morka’s references to the Mambilla arbitration, accusing the APC spokesman of confusing issues raised during the proceedings with findings allegedly made by the tribunal.
Shaibu said the tribunal questioned Leno Adesanya’s explanation concerning a $500,000 payment to Jennifer Douglas but did not find that Atiku received a bribe or used his office to secure the disputed Mambilla contract for Sunrise.
“It did not find that Atiku received a bribe or used his office to secure the disputed Mambilla contract for Sunrise. Besides, the tribunal held that there was actually no contract. So, the purported bribe was to what end?” he argued.
Shaibu maintained that while the tribunal may have sought further clarification over Adesanya’s explanation of the payment, that did not amount to a corruption conviction against Atiku.
ADC Cites US Senate Report
The council also referenced a 2010 United States Senate report, arguing that the document did not establish Atiku’s criminal guilt.
According to Shaibu, the report examined transfers involving Atiku and Jennifer Douglas but did not establish that Atiku personally received illicit payments.
“It stated that no evidence was introduced at William Jefferson’s trial showing Atiku sought or accepted a bribe from him. It recorded a Nigerian Senate committee’s recommendation for sanctions over PTDF, but found no evidence that the Senate imposed them,” he said.
The ADC campaign council therefore maintained that allegations, investigative records and references in reports should not be presented as equivalent to a criminal conviction.
The dispute comes as political parties and their presidential candidates intensify preparations for the 2027 general elections.
