By Joyce Ekeh
Former Vice President and presidential candidate of the African Democratic Congress, ADC, Atiku Abubakar, has vowed to “follow the money” in an independent probe of ₦33.75 billion reportedly paid to 3.29 million vulnerable Nigerian households under the Federal Government’s cash transfer programme.
Atiku’s proposed investigation comes amid questions raised by an audit report over the payment of the funds and the availability of records to verify whether the money actually reached the intended beneficiaries.
He said his team would assemble independent financial, audit, technology and public-accounting experts to examine the payment trail and determine what happened to the funds.
In a statement issued yesterday by his Senior Special Assistant on Public Communication, Phrank Shaibu, Atiku said Nigerians could not be expected to trust the same government whose expenditure was being questioned to investigate itself.
“My team will constitute an independent group of financial, audit, technology and public-accounting experts to interrogate the available records surrounding these cash-transfer payments,” Atiku said.
“We will follow the money as far as the available public and institutional records permit. We will examine the beneficiary figures, payment channels, reconciliation records, audit queries and every material inconsistency that has emerged. When that work is completed, we will furnish Nigerians with the findings.”
The former vice president said the controversy was more than an accounting dispute, arguing that the amount reportedly allocated to millions of households was already inadequate against the backdrop of the cost-of-living crisis.
According to him, ₦33.75 billion shared among 3.29 million households amounts to approximately ₦10,258 per household.
“This is beyond a bookkeeping scandal. The intervention is insultingly small, yet even that small amount cannot be cleanly accounted for,” Atiku said.
“If money meant for hungry Nigerians cannot be satisfactorily traced while access to records required for accountability is frustrated, then what we are witnessing is unapologetic wickedness against the poor.”
The audit concerns, according to Atiku, include ₦33.75 billion reportedly paid to 3.29 million beneficiaries, ₦36.74 billion in payments allegedly made without pre-payment audit and another ₦4.62 billion for which payment vouchers were reportedly not produced.
He said the figures could not simply be dismissed as irregularities buried in government accounts because they involved money appropriated in the name of Nigerians struggling with rising food, transportation, electricity and energy costs.
“These are resources appropriated in the name of poor Nigerians who desperately need protection from a cost-of-living crisis aggravated by this administration’s rash economic policies,” he said.
Atiku also questioned the consistency of government figures on the cash transfer programme.
He noted that the Federal Government had claimed that more than ₦600 billion had been disbursed to over 10 million households, after Nigerians had previously been told that about 15 million households were beneficiaries.
“It now appears that the Tinubu administration cannot give Nigerians a coherent account of how many households actually benefited from its intervention programme, while significant portions of the expenditure have failed to withstand independent audit scrutiny,” he said.
The ADC presidential candidate insisted that government announcements alone could not establish that beneficiaries actually received the money.
“A ministerial announcement is not proof of payment. A name on a social register is not a bank alert,” he said.
Atiku also challenged authorities to make available verifiable payment records, saying electronic transactions should leave an audit trail.
“There must be no black box around the poor man’s money,” he said.
“If Remita processed these transactions, the relevant records should be available for scrutiny. If beneficiaries received the money, there should be evidence. If access to records was obstructed, Nigerians deserve to know by whom and why.”
He commended the Auditor-General of the Federation, Shaakaa Chira, for raising questions over the expenditure, describing the action as an example of institutional accountability.
“That is what institutions are supposed to do — protect the public purse, not the political comfort of those in power,” Atiku said.
The former vice president said the controversy also exposed what he described as the limitations of relying on palliatives to address Nigeria’s worsening economic hardship.
According to him, Nigerians need increased purchasing power and economic policies capable of reducing the cost of transportation, food and energy rather than repeated temporary interventions.
“Our intervention will follow production. It will support domestic refining, increase local supply, reduce the cost of energy and ensure that the benefit reaches Nigerians through lower prices,” he said.
“When fuel costs fall, transportation costs ease; when transportation costs ease, pressure on food prices and household budgets reduces.”
Atiku accused the Tinubu administration of worsening the pressure on poor households through the removal of fuel subsidy, increased taxes and higher electricity and transportation costs, while failing to provide adequate accountability over the interventions designed to cushion the impact.
He demanded that government publish a verifiable payment trail for the disputed funds.
“If the beneficiaries were genuine, government should publish the verifiable payment trail, and if the money did not reach them, it should be recovered,” he said.
“And if investigation establishes that any official diverted, misapplied or misappropriated funds meant for vulnerable Nigerians, that official must face prosecution.”
Atiku said Nigerians had already borne the burden of higher fuel prices, food costs, electricity bills, transportation fares and taxes, arguing that they should not also lose funds appropriated in their name.
The proposed probe now places the cash transfer programme under renewed scrutiny, with questions over the actual number of beneficiaries, the payment trail and the extent to which the Federal Government’s social intervention funds have reached the vulnerable Nigerians they were designed to support.
