The presidential candidate of the African Democratic Congress (ADC), Atiku Abubakar, has criticised President Bola Ahmed Tinubu over comments linking Nigeria’s pension challenges to the administration of former President Olusegun Obasanjo, describing the remarks as an attempt to blame past governments instead of addressing current challenges.
According to a statement signed by the Atiku Media Office, the former vice president said President Tinubu’s comments to a delegation of North-East political stakeholders led by Borno State Governor Babagana Zulum amounted to “ghosting and blaming past administrations” rather than providing solutions.
The statement argued that government is a continuum and maintained that every administration inherits both the assets and liabilities of its predecessors.
It stated that when the Obasanjo/Atiku administration assumed office in 1999, it inherited an unfunded Defined Benefits Scheme (DBS) with an estimated pension liability exceeding ₦2 trillion, but responded by introducing reforms instead of assigning blame.
According to the statement, the administration enacted the Pension Reform Act 2004, established the National Pension Commission (PenCom), and introduced the Contributory Pension Scheme (CPS), which it said transformed Nigeria’s pension administration by replacing the previous pay-as-you-go system with a fully funded and privately managed framework.
The Atiku Media Office also maintained that the reforms institutionalised the use of Pension Fund Administrators (PFAs) and Pension Fund Custodians (PFCs), helping to prevent the accumulation of new unfunded pension liabilities and laying the foundation for the growth of Nigeria’s pension assets.
The statement further argued that the Obasanjo/Atiku administration initiated broader economic reforms, including debt repayment and policies aimed at liberalising the economy and encouraging investment in sectors such as banking, telecommunications, hospitality, and infrastructure.
It urged the Tinubu administration to concentrate on addressing the country’s current socio-economic challenges, including insecurity, unemployment, economic hardship, and rising public discontent, rather than attributing present-day problems to previous governments.