•Nigeria’s former presidents
The ruling All Progressives Congress and major opposition parties in the country have disagreed over the humongous N27 billion voted by the federal government for the entitlements of former presidents, vice presidents, heads of state, chiefs of staff, retired heads of service, and professors in the 2025 fiscal year.
Beneficiaries of this allocation include former Presidents Olusegun Obasanjo, Goodluck Jonathan, and Muhammadu Buhari, alongside ex-vice-presidents Atiku Abubakar, Namadi Sambo, and Prof. Yemi Osinbajo, reports The PUNCH.
Others expected to benefit are ex-military Heads of State, Gen. Yakubu Gowon (retd.) and Gen. Abdulsalami Abubakar (retd.), as well as former military President, Ibrahim Babangida, and retired Chief of General Staff, Commodore Ebitu Ukiwe.
President Bola Tinubu presented the 2025 budget, titled ‘Budget of Restoration: Securing Peace, Rebuilding Prosperity,’ to a joint session of the National Assembly on Wednesday.
However, the opposition called for transparency regarding the allocation for the former Presidents, insisting that Nigerians have a right to know the purpose of the funds.
Reacting, the Peoples Democratic Party Deputy National Youth Leader, Timothy Osadolor, stated that millions of Nigerians are in need of the funds, not the former leaders.
He said, “This government is so erratic and thick that it is immune to public criticisms, insensitive to public opinion, and lacks any integrity to protect or care for. In the history of this country, I have yet to see who is not a billionaire among Jonathan, Obasanjo, Atiku or IBB.
“Instead of this, President Tinubu should invest it in more social causes that will benefit the people of this country. They should start a food bank where Nigerians, who are dying in stampedes across the country can benefit. Alternatively, they can channel it into building healthcare institutions.
“Our former leaders deserve the right to live comfortably. I have no doubt about it. It is more important for millions of Nigerians to stay alive than to nurture leaders who, on their own, can take care of generations and other people’s families.”
The National Publicity Secretary of the New Nigeria People’s Party, Ladipo Johnson, shared his sentiment.
Johnson lamented that the budget was a clear testament that the President Tinubu was not in touch with reality.
“All I can say is that, generally, the budget gives us a view and allows us to form an opinion on how this administration is insensitive to the plight of the people. They have benchmarks that the president stated in his budget.
“It gives you a feeling that the budget is not a realistic one. I am not limiting it to just what the government votes for past leaders. A lot of things in that budget show that they are not in touch with what people are feeling,” he stated.
The National Youth Leader of the Labour Party, Kennedy Ahanotu, noted that budgeting money for past leaders shouldn’t be seen as a privilege in perpetuity.
He said, “Even in the United States, it is like that. Former presidents and other leaders are taken care of. There are some bills paid to be able to manage them. So it is not wrong for any country to take care of their past leaders and manage their lifestyles.
“But it should not be at the detriment of the taxpayers and the people who are already suffering. It has to be respected. So, whatever project they have for them should not be to the detriment of the people. It does not make sense.”
The National Secretary of the Coalition for United Political Parties, Peter Ahmeh, called it unfair to allocate such a large sum for former leaders while many Nigerians continue to suffer.
In an exclusive interview with our correspondent, Ahmeh suggested that the money should be redirected to other sectors that would directly benefit millions of Nigerians.
He stated, “My take is that seeking elective office is a voluntary decision made by any citizen who wants to serve his country. When you seek this voluntary service, during your time in office, you are given allowances and honorariums to maintain a standard of living during that period because you have a job to do.
“It is not fair to budget 27 billion for former presidents, who are just a tiny number of people who have governed this country, while the masses are suffering. The masses are in pain and hungry, and yet, you budget N27bn. You could have used that money to improve hospitals and even invest in agriculture to address the food crisis.”
On his part, the National Chairman of the Social Democratic Party, Shehu Gabam, queried the purpose of the money, saying the Presidency owes Nigerians an explanation.
In an interview with our correspondent, Gabam stressed that the details of the funds must be disclosed to Nigerians.
He stated, “So, I don’t know the specification of that allocation. If it is based on the remunerations periodically, yearly, or quarterly, I don’t have much detail about it.
“So, for me, I won’t comment further on that, because it has to be explained. Whether it’s going to be an honorarium or otherwise, Nigerians deserve to know.”
But the APC called for understanding, saying being in the opposition doesn’t necessitate that the parties should kick against every move of the ruling party.
However, the Deputy National Organising Secretary of the APC, Nze Chidi Duru, defended the budget, saying taking care of past leaders of the country has always been a privilege.
He said, “Anything that will elevate the standards of our leaders is something I would personally encourage. It is also understandable that the views being expressed as to ensure that the comforts, safety and security being presented to them (past leaders) are not excessive and should reflect the reality of the times.
“The details of what has been provided can be found in the budget submitted to the National Assembly. It is here that the gladiators and those who mean well for Nigeria need to further interrogate the process on whether what is being provided is excessive.
“Their comfort is the comfort of the state. I would like to believe that our APC government would have reviewed and pointed out what are not necessary.”
