Former House of Representatives member Ehiozuwa Johnson Agbonayinma has defended his decision to petition the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) over allegations involving former Vice-President Atiku Abubakar, insisting that the focus should remain on the issues raised in the petition rather than attacks on his person.

The renewed dispute followed criticism of the petition by former Senator Dino Melaye, who has questioned the basis for revisiting allegations involving Atiku. Agbonayinma has now challenged Melaye to produce an official EFCC decision or court record showing that the allegations referenced in his petition had been dismissed or that Atiku had been cleared.

Key Takeaways

• Agbonayinma says he petitioned the EFCC as part of a call for greater accountability in public affairs.
• He has rejected criticism of his decision to raise the allegations involving Atiku.
• The former lawmaker challenged Dino Melaye to produce an official EFCC or court record supporting claims that the matter had previously been dismissed.
• Agbonayinma said the substance of the petition should take priority over questions about his identity or political affiliations.
• He urged the EFCC to carry out its statutory responsibilities and allow any relevant investigation to take its course.

Why Agbonayinma Is Defending the Petition

Agbonayinma said his decision to approach the EFCC was driven by his position that allegations involving public figures should be subjected to the appropriate institutional process.

He described himself as a concerned Nigerian seeking greater accountability in public affairs and maintained that submitting the petition should not be treated as a personal attack on Atiku.

The former lawmaker’s position is that the allegations contained in the petition should be considered on their substance rather than dismissed because of questions surrounding the person who submitted them.

Agbonayinma Challenges Melaye Over Evidence

A central part of Agbonayinma’s response is his challenge to Melaye to provide documentary evidence supporting the claim that the allegations involving Atiku had already been dealt with.

He specifically asked Melaye to produce any official decision by the EFCC or a court record showing that Atiku had been cleared of the allegations referenced in the petition.

That challenge places the focus of the dispute on the documentary record surrounding the allegations rather than on the personalities involved.

Agbonayinma also questioned why criticism was being directed at him personally instead of addressing the substance of what he had submitted to the anti-corruption agency.

“Rather than attacking my person, character and integrity, why not address the substance of the petition?”

Melaye’s Opposition to the Petition

Melaye has opposed the move to revisit the allegations against Atiku, arguing that the issues had previously been investigated and dismissed.

His criticism has added a political dimension to the dispute, with the former senator questioning the basis and credibility of Agbonayinma’s petition.

Agbonayinma, however, has rejected the approach of responding to the petition by attacking his character or political identity.

The disagreement therefore centres on two different questions: whether the allegations should be revisited and what official records exist concerning the previous handling of the matter.

Agbonayinma Says the EFCC Should Do Its Job

Agbonayinma has also called on the EFCC to perform its statutory responsibilities without interference.

His argument is that the appropriate institution should be allowed to examine the issues raised in the petition and determine what action, if any, is warranted.

The former lawmaker further argued that if the allegations do not establish wrongdoing, Atiku should be allowed to respond to whatever questions may arise through a proper investigative process.

“You cannot defend Atiku Abubakar from an EFCC petition by attacking me.”

He also challenged those who claim to have evidence against him to present it, while asking anyone with facts concerning the petition to make them available.

“If you have evidence against me, bring it forward. If you have facts concerning the petition, present them.”

What Happens Next?

The immediate dispute remains centred on the petition, the competing claims about the earlier handling of the allegations and the evidence being demanded by Agbonayinma.

Agbonayinma’s position is that the allegations should be considered through the appropriate institutional process rather than through personal or political attacks.

The question of what action the EFCC may take on the petition remains separate from the claims and counterclaims made by the politicians involved.

For now, the controversy continues to revolve around whether the allegations raised by Agbonayinma warrant further examination and what official records exist concerning their previous treatment.