By George Mgbeleke

The Human Rights Writers Association of Nigeria (HURIWA) says the continued non-utilisation of the official residence built for Vice President Kashim Shettima, nearly two years after its completion and commissioning, has vindicated the serious reservations it earlier expressed over the project.
HURIWA recalls that it had questioned the wisdom of committing several billions of naira to the construction and completion of a massive residential edifice for the Vice President at a time when millions of Nigerians were battling poverty, unemployment, insecurity and deteriorating living conditions.
The association had particularly expressed concern that the project was being pursued by an administration that had simultaneously imposed difficult economic reforms on Nigerians through the removal of petrol subsidy and the floating of the naira, developments that significantly affected the purchasing power of citizens.
HURIWA had described the project as an “intolerable error of judgment”, arguing that the priority of government at a time of widespread hardship should be the welfare of citizens and reduction in the cost of governance.
As Comrade Emmanuel Nnadozie Onwubiko, National Coordinator of HURIWA, stated at the time:
“It is an intolerable error of judgment that the government embarked on such white elephant projects as the completion of a multi-billion naira mansion for the Vice President at a time when millions of Nigerian households are experiencing multidimensional poverty.”
“Why build such a massive mansion for the Vice President when the country is among the poverty capitals of the world? When you reduce the cost of governance, it becomes easier to take care of the citizens.”
HURIWA says the subsequent development surrounding the residence has made those concerns even more compelling.
The project, originally awarded in 2010 at about N7 billion and abandoned for several years, was revived under the Federal Capital Territory Administration and eventually completed at a cost that reportedly rose to about N21 billion, with additional public funding of approximately N22 billion reportedly committed to the project and associated works.
The facility was commissioned in June 2024, with the Federal Government presenting its completion as part of efforts to ensure that inherited projects did not become wasted public investments.
Yet, almost two years after its commissioning, the Vice President has continued to use Akinola Aguda House as his official residence.
For HURIWA, this development raises a fundamental question: what exactly has happened to the enormous public resources committed to a building that was specifically intended to serve as the official residence of the Vice President?
The association says it is particularly troubling that after such massive expenditure, questions are still being raised about the suitability of the facility for occupation.
If the funds committed to the project covered everything necessary to make the building suitable for the Vice President to move in, then the continued non-use of the facility raises legitimate questions about the adequacy of the project execution and the management of the public funds committed to it.
HURIWA believes that the situation should not become an excuse for another round of government expenditure.
The association therefore advocates that no further public funds should be committed to the mansion without a transparent explanation to Nigerians of why the billions already spent have not achieved the intended objective.
If the facility is still considered unsuitable for the Vice President after the enormous expenditure already incurred, HURIWA says that would raise serious questions about the prudence and judgment behind proceeding with the project in the first place.
The association says Nigerians should not be asked to continually pay for decisions that were made without sufficient regard for economic realities and public interest.
HURIWA is equally concerned that the controversy surrounding the residence should not be allowed to degenerate into speculation over unverified claims. What Nigerians need is a transparent account of the project: the original contract sum, variations, additional allocations, total expenditure, scope of work and the reasons the facility has remained unused for its intended purpose.
More importantly, HURIWA believes that the situation now presents an opportunity for government to turn an expensive and underutilised public asset into something that directly benefits ordinary Nigerians.
The association therefore advocates the conversion of the Vice President’s residence into a General Hospital for low-income earners, unemployed Nigerians and other vulnerable residents of Abuja.
HURIWA says such a conversion would provide a constructive public purpose for an edifice on which enormous taxpayers’ resources have already been expended.
At a time when many Nigerians struggle to access affordable and quality healthcare, the association believes that transforming the facility into a public hospital would give citizens a tangible benefit from an expenditure that has already generated widespread concerns over public-sector priorities.
HURIWA stresses that this advocacy is not targeted at the office or person of the Vice President. Rather, it is a call for responsible management of public assets and a reconsideration of how government can derive maximum public value from resources that have already been committed.
The association maintains that public expenditure should ultimately serve the public good.
Where billions of naira have already been spent on an asset that is not serving its original purpose, government should look beyond the original intention and consider how the asset can be repurposed to address the pressing needs of the Nigerian people.
For HURIWA, a General Hospital serving poor and vulnerable Nigerians would be a far more meaningful legacy for the controversial edifice than allowing it to remain an expensive, underutilised monument to questionable public expenditure.

By David Owei

*A seat was reportedly secured for Bola near United States President Donald Trump at the world’s most important annual diplomatic gathering. Yet, for the third consecutive year, Tinubu refused to occupy it.*

Former Vice President Atiku Abubakar has demanded a full explanation from President Tinubu over his repeated absence from the United Nations General Assembly, asking whether the President’s documented history with United States law-enforcement agencies has become a burden on Nigeria’s foreign relations.

In a statement issued on Sunday by his Senior Special Assistant on Public Communication, Mr Phrank Shaibu, Atiku said Tinubu stayed away from the 79th UNGA session in 2024, the 80th in 2025 and now the 81st in 2026, repeatedly sending Vice President Kashim Shettima to stand in for him.

He said three consecutive absences could no longer be dismissed as coincidence or routine delegation but constituted a pattern of presidential evasion requiring an honest explanation.

“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.

“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.

“Presidential absence on the global stage has consequences. UNGA is not merely a ceremonial gathering or an annual photo opportunity. Its sidelines are where leaders hold decisive bilateral meetings, court investors, negotiate trade partnerships, mobilise development finance and make the case for their countries.

“When a President makes himself absent from that stage for three consecutive years, his country loses opportunities. 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.

“The cost is eventually transferred to ordinary citizens: fewer investments mean fewer businesses and fewer jobs. Reduced capital inflows place additional pressure on the local currency. A weaker naira raises the cost of imports, production, transportation and food. These are among the economic pressures now punishing Nigerian families through the worst cost-of-living crisis in living memory.

“Tinubu may consider attending UNGA a matter of personal prerogative, but the economic and diplomatic consequences of his absence are being paid by Nigerians. A President may surrender his seat, but a nation cannot escape the bill.”

Atiku described as extraordinary the reported announcement by Nigeria’s Permanent Representative to the United Nations, Jimoh Ibrahim, that he had secured Tinubu a seat “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? Why celebrate securing a strategic seat for the President when the President had no intention of occupying it?

“That contradiction becomes even more scandalous when Nigerians remember that Tinubu’s administration committed up to $9 million of Nigeria’s scarce foreign exchange to American lobbyists supposedly hired to improve its standing before the government and people of the United States.

“What exactly did Nigerians purchase with that money? Why spend millions of dollars lobbying Washington while Tinubu repeatedly stays away from New York? 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?

“Did the lobbyists fail, or is Tinubu’s American baggage simply too heavy for any public-relations firm to carry?”

Atiku said the President’s persistent avoidance of the United States inevitably invites troubling questions.

*“Is Tinubu afraid that he could become Donald Trump’s next Nicolás Maduro* ?

“Is he haunted by the controversies surrounding his American academic claims and his documented drug-related forfeiture history?

“Is this the kind of President Nigeria deserves — one who projects bravado at home but appears terrified of scrutiny abroad?”

Atiku said these questions were legitimate because of Case No. 93 C 4483 before the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, in which the United States government instituted forfeiture proceedings concerning funds held in multiple accounts in the name of Bola Tinubu and associated companies.

He noted that the verified complaint was brought under federal laws governing the forfeiture of assets that were connected to narcotics trafficking and money laundering.

“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.”

“Nigerians are therefore entitled to ask whether Tinubu’s three consecutive UNGA absences have anything to do with this documented American history.

“We are not asserting that Tinubu is legally prohibited from entering the United States. The Presidency has announced no such restriction. But if no legal, diplomatic, medical or personal impediment exists, why has Tinubu repeatedly avoided the 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? Has one man’s personal history become a burden on Nigeria’s diplomatic engagement?”

Atiku said Tinubu’s conduct presented a glaring contrast between the image he cultivated at home and the timidity he displayed on the international stage.

“So why is Tinubu eternally paranoid about the global podium, especially when that podium stands in the United States?

“Here is a President who professes tigritude at home, draped in an assortment of aliases, including ‘Jagaban,’ the leader of warriors in the Borgu Emirate, and ‘Asiwaju,’ the one who supposedly leads from the front, but who becomes a whimpering, lilly livered and timid chicken on the global stage.

“Nigeria’s foreign standing has never been more miniaturised. Under Tinubu, the country rarely features prominently in continental leadership, the Commonwealth or world affairs.

“His government deployed Nigerian fighter jets and troops to Benin Republic following the December 2025 attempted coup while bandits, terrorists and freelance criminals continued to terrorise Nigerians at home.

“Nigeria could project military power across its border, yet its President could not project Nigeria’s voice from its seat at the United Nations. That contradiction is humiliating.”

Atiku demanded that the Presidency state unequivocally whether Tinubu was free to travel to the United States and disclose the real reason for his third consecutive UNGA absence.

“If there is no impediment, the Presidency must explain this serial absenteeism. If an impediment exists, Nigerians have a right to know,” he said.

“Nigeria is bigger than Bola. Our diplomatic influence, economic interests and international reputation must not be subordinated to Tinubu’s American baggage.

“After committing up to $9 million to American lobbyists, Nigerians deserve more than silence, evasions and another empty presidential seat at the United Nations.

“Is this the kind of President Nigeria deserves?

“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?”

By George Mgbeleke
The Human Rights Writers Association of Nigeria (HURIWA) has rejected the Federal Government’s latest push for state governors to reduce transportation fares through Compressed Natural Gas (CNG) buses, insisting that the measure, while potentially helpful to commuters, cannot by itself resolve Nigeria’s deepening cost-of-living crisis.

HURIWA in a statement by its natonal coordinator,Comrade Emmanuel Nnadozie Onwubiko, said the Federal Government must urgently confront the root cause of the escalating cost of transportation and production by taking decisive steps to bring down the price of petrol to a level that Nigerians and businesses can sustain.

The rights group is therefore calling for a drastic reduction of petrol prices towards the N180-per-litre level obtainable in 2021, arguing that Nigerians cannot continue to absorb the cascading effects of high energy costs across virtually every sector of the economy.

The call followed President Bola Tinubu’s directive to the 36 state governors to ensure measurable reductions in transportation costs from October 1 through expanded CNG and electric-powered public transportation programmes.

While HURIWA acknowledges the potential benefits of cheaper-energy buses, it insists that CNG buses are not a magic wand for an economy being battered by high energy costs.

The association notes that the cost of petrol does not affect transportation alone.

It directly and indirectly influences the cost of manufacturing, agriculture, food distribution, logistics, construction, small businesses and virtually every activity dependent on energy and transportation.

When the price of fuel rises uncontrollably, HURIWA says, the consequences travel through the entire economic chain.

A manufacturer pays more to power machinery and transport raw materials. A farmer pays more to move produce. A trader pays more to transport goods to the market. A small business pays more to operate generators. Ultimately, the Nigerian consumer pays the additional cost through higher prices.

This is why HURIWA considers the current approach of placing the burden of reducing transportation costs principally on state governors inadequate.

President Tinubu is the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria and bears the ultimate responsibility for national economic policy and the protection of the welfare of citizens.

HURIWA therefore finds it unacceptable for the Federal Government to appear to be shifting responsibility for the consequences of high fuel prices to state governors.

Governors cannot determine the international price of crude oil, regulate the entire downstream petroleum sector or independently resolve the structural weaknesses responsible for Nigeria’s energy crisis.

They can provide interventions, but they cannot substitute for a coherent national energy policy.

HURIWA consequently urges President Tinubu to move beyond temporary palliatives and take urgent measures capable of producing a sustainable reduction in energy costs.

The association notes the President’s argument that returning to the old petrol subsidy regime would expose Nigeria to the enormous fiscal burden associated with subsidy payments.

However, HURIWA insists that rejecting the former subsidy system must not mean abandoning Nigerians to uncontrolled energy costs.

There must be a credible middle ground between a ruinous subsidy regime and a situation where millions of Nigerians are priced out of transportation, food, production and basic economic activity.

The Federal Government must therefore explore every lawful fiscal, regulatory and market-based instrument available to stabilise fuel prices while protecting the most vulnerable Nigerians.

HURIWA also calls for greater transparency in the pricing structure of petrol, including the cost of crude, refining, importation, transportation, margins, taxes and other charges contributing to the pump price.

Nigerians deserve to know exactly why the price they pay at the pump remains so burdensome and what concrete measures the government is taking to bring it down.

The association welcomes the reported expansion of CNG conversion centres and alternative-energy transportation across the country, but warns against presenting these initiatives as a comprehensive solution to the nation’s economic crisis.

A CNG bus can reduce the fare paid by a passenger on one route; it cannot by itself reduce the cost of feeding a family, operating a factory, transporting farm produce or powering thousands of small businesses.

That distinction, HURIWA says, must guide the Federal Government’s response.

The association is particularly concerned about the potential consequences for the manufacturing sector if energy costs remain persistently high.

Manufacturers already operating under severe cost pressures may be forced to reduce production, increase prices or shut down altogether when the cost of energy and logistics becomes unsustainable.

Such closures would worsen unemployment, reduce domestic production and increase Nigeria’s dependence on imported goods.

HURIWA therefore urges the Federal Government to treat energy-price stability as a national economic emergency, rather than principally as a transportation problem.

The rights group further calls for accelerated domestic refining capacity, greater competition in the downstream petroleum sector, transparent pricing and targeted measures that can reduce the cost of energy for manufacturers, farmers, transport operators and households.

HURIWA believes that Nigerians should not be forced to choose between feeding their families and paying transportation costs.

The organisation equally warns state governments against passing the burden of expensive transportation entirely to already impoverished citizens and urges them to ensure that every subsidy or intervention genuinely reaches commuters.

Nigeria needs a comprehensive energy and economic rescue plan, not isolated interventions that merely move the burden from one level of government to another.

HURIWA therefore calls on President Tinubu to urgently convene relevant economic managers, state governments, labour, manufacturers, transport operators and civil society organisations to develop a sustainable framework for reducing energy and transportation costs.

The association maintains that the ultimate objective must be to restore the purchasing power of ordinary Nigerians, revive domestic production and prevent the continued erosion of living standards.

The Nigerian people need affordable fuel, affordable transportation, affordable food and an economy in which production is once again viable.

CNG is part of the solution, but CNG cannot become an excuse for government to avoid confronting the wider fuel-price crisis.

HURIWA urges the Federal Government to act decisively before the combination of high energy costs, declining purchasing power and rising production expenses pushes more Nigerians and businesses beyond the limits of survival.

The time for fragmented interventions is over. Nigeria needs a comprehensive economic response that puts the welfare of its citizens at the centre.