Former Vice President Atiku Abubakar has challenged President Bola Tinubu to account for the ₦10 billion reportedly approved for Ebola preparedness, accusing the Federal Government of failing to protect Nigerians despite announcing emergency funding months before a confirmed case in Abuja.
Atiku, who described the reported lapses as a dangerous breakdown in public health preparedness, demanded the publication of disbursement records, contracts, beneficiaries and evidence of supplies delivered with the funds.
He also raised concerns over the handling of the reported case, alleging delays in public confirmation, inadequate protection for frontline health workers and lapses in monitoring people who had come into contact with the patient.
In a statement issued by Phrank Shaibu, Director of Strategic Communication of the African Democratic Congress (ADC) Presidential Campaign Council, Atiku said the outbreak had exposed troubling questions about the government’s preparedness, surveillance and emergency response.
“Ebola is a grave public health threat. Nigerians deserve urgent action, competent leadership and the truth,” he said, insisting that a public announcement of emergency funding could not substitute for verifiable evidence that the money had reached the agencies and personnel responsible for containing the disease.
“Where is the money? Publish the amount actually disbursed, the dates of payment, every contract awarded, every recipient and every item delivered,” Atiku demanded.
He argued that if the funds had not been released, Tinubu owed Nigerians an explanation for announcing emergency financing that allegedly failed to reach those tasked with protecting public health.
“A press statement cannot replace an audit,” he added.
Nine-Day Gap Raises Questions
Atiku cited the reported timeline of the case, claiming that the patient arrived in Nigeria on October 5, developed symptoms on October 7 and sought medical attention at a private hospital on October 11, while the government did not publicly confirm the case until October 20.
He described the interval as a critical period during which authorities should have activated effective surveillance, contact tracing and protective measures.
According to him, 44 close contacts were left unmonitored during the period, while private health workers who attended to the patient allegedly lacked adequate protective equipment.
The former vice president demanded a detailed account of the response at every stage, including the screening conducted upon the patient’s arrival, the follow-up initiated after symptoms emerged and the time authorities first contacted and began monitoring the 44 people.
He also asked why frontline medical personnel were allegedly left without the protective equipment required to manage a potentially dangerous infectious disease.
Atiku insisted that Nigerians deserved clear answers and that officials responsible for any established lapses should be held accountable.
Questions Presidential Task Force
The ADC chieftain also questioned the structure of the Presidential Task Force announced by Tinubu in June to coordinate Ebola preparedness, which he said was chaired by the President’s Chief of Staff, Femi Gbajabiamila.
He argued that political appointees should not overshadow medical professionals in managing a public health emergency, stressing that the Nigeria Centre for Disease Control and Prevention (NCDC), epidemiologists, doctors and other public health experts should lead the technical response.
“Nigerians must ask whether political appointees have been allowed to overshadow the medical experts who should lead this response,” he said.
“The NCDC, epidemiologists, doctors and public health professionals must be in charge, with the authority and resources to act. Political titles cannot trace contacts, equip hospitals or save lives.”
His criticism places the spotlight on the coordination of the emergency response, the release and utilisation of preparedness funds, and the capacity of public health institutions to identify and contain infectious disease threats.
However, the allegations concerning the funding, contact monitoring and adequacy of protective equipment require verification and a response from the relevant government agencies.
Atiku Alleges Plot To Restrict Campaigns
Beyond the public health concerns, Atiku accused the government of potentially exploiting the outbreak to restrict political activities ahead of the 2027 general elections.
He alleged that information available to him suggested that the Minister of Health’s scheduled press conference was intended to discourage Nigerians from attending campaign rallies and, ultimately, from voting.
The former vice president described the alleged intention as alarming, arguing that an emergency response must not become a pretext for limiting political participation or undermining democratic rights.
His claim about the purpose of the planned press conference was not independently established in the statement.
Atiku also questioned the Minister of Health’s role in communicating the government’s response, alleging that the ministry had received only ₦35 million in disbursements under the 2025 appropriation and had not been involved in the Ebola prevention programme.
He argued that the government needed to explain the division of responsibilities among the Ministry of Health, the NCDC and the presidential task force, particularly regarding preparedness funding and emergency coordination.
Economic Hardship Compounds Public Anxiety
Atiku linked the controversy to the economic difficulties facing Nigerians, warning that a poorly managed health emergency could further disrupt movement, livelihoods and economic activity.
He argued that citizens should not have to bear the consequences of economic hardship and then face additional risks arising from an allegedly inadequate emergency response.
“The people must not pay twice for the same failure: first through hardship, then through a bungled emergency response,” he said, blaming Tinubu’s administration for what he characterised as failures in both economic management and public health preparedness.
The former vice president’s intervention adds a political dimension to concerns surrounding Ebola preparedness, placing pressure on the Federal Government to clarify the status of the announced ₦10 billion, explain the reported handling of the Abuja case and provide evidence of the measures taken to protect health workers and trace contacts.
The central questions now facing the authorities are whether the preparedness funds were released and properly utilised, whether surveillance and contact-tracing procedures were followed promptly, and whether the response is being coordinated by the relevant medical experts.
The Federal Government’s detailed response to the specific allegations would be necessary to establish the facts surrounding the funding, the reported monitoring gaps and the circumstances of the case.
