$500k Payment: ICC Raised Red Flag But Found No Proof Against Atiku
By Sanusi Muhammad
The APC Presidential Campaign Council appears to have found something to say about Atiku, but unfortunately, what it presented looks more like political interpretation than a faithful representation of what the ICC tribunal actually established.
The Mambilla issue deserves scrutiny. The $500,000 payment made by Leno Adesanya to Jennifer Douglas, Atiku Abubakar’s then-wife, in January 2003 is certainly a matter that raises legitimate questions. The ICC tribunal itself said the circumstances surrounding the payment raised “significant red flags” and found that Adesanya failed to provide sufficient documentary or independent witness evidence to support his explanation that it was a legitimate foreign-exchange transaction. But political campaigns should not turn red flags into convictions.
The same tribunal expressly stated that there was no evidence on the arbitration record that Atiku Abubakar actually exercised his duties as a government official in a manner that fostered the award of the contract to Sunrise Power. It also said it could not exclude a possible connection between the payment and Atiku’s government role. Those are two different findings, and responsible political communication should preserve that distinction.
The APC is therefore free to question Atiku and demand answers. What it should not do is present an arbitration award as though it were a criminal conviction against a man whom the tribunal did not find to have received a bribe or to have abused his office. If the APC Presidential Campaign Council has evidence that proves otherwise, let it publish the exact pages and paragraphs of the ICC award. Nigerians can read the document and make their own judgment.
There is also an irony that should not be lost. The same ICC tribunal rejected Sunrise Power’s claims against Nigeria, with Sunrise and Adesanya ordered to reimburse Nigeria for 75 percent of its legal fees and expenses. So, if the APC wants to celebrate the outcome as a victory for Nigeria, it should equally be prepared to explain the award accurately rather than selectively extracting portions that serve its political narrative.
Nigerians deserve political parties that can engage with facts, policies, records and ideas — not parties that appear to be searching desperately for anything they can use against their opponents. The 2027 election should not become a competition in who can distort an international arbitration award most effectively.
APC should find something more meaningful and convincing to say about its own record, policies and plans for Nigeria instead of demonstrating to the world that attacking an opponent is easier than defending its own record. Political competition is inevitable. But intellectual honesty should not be optional. Let the ICC award speak for itself.
*Muhammad is a commentator on national issues*
