Reported by Ariajegbe Sylvia Esezobor
The All Progressives Congress Presidential Campaign Council has challenged former Vice President Atiku Abubakar to explain the legal and fiscal basis of his proposal to introduce a production subsidy for locally refined petrol, saying the plan lacks a clear legal framework and could enrich smugglers rather than lower pump prices for Nigerians.
In a statement issued on Sunday by its spokesman, Dele Alake, the campaign council said Atiku’s proposal, which he reiterated at a press conference in Abuja on Friday, raised important questions about its compatibility with the Petroleum Industry Act 2021, its cost to government and the mechanism through which it would translate into lower pump prices for consumers. The council cited Section 205(1) of the PIA, which provides that unrestricted free-market conditions shall determine wholesale and retail prices of petroleum products. It also referenced a statement by the Nigerian Midstream and Downstream Petroleum Regulatory Authority, which said it neither fixes pump prices nor issues administrative price templates except where statutory conditions for intervention are met. According to the council, the regulator said no such market failure has been declared.
The APC-PCC asked whether a refinery receiving the proposed subsidy would be required to sell petrol at a prescribed price. If the answer is yes, Alake said, Atiku should identify the legal framework under which the government would impose that price condition and explain how it would operate consistently with the Petroleum Industry Act. If the answer is no, he said, Atiku should explain how public support to refiners would guarantee lower prices at filling stations. “Without an enforceable mechanism, refiners could receive the benefit while consumers continued to pay market prices,” the statement said.
The council further demanded that Atiku disclose the cost of his proposal and how he would fund it. It noted that his earlier remarks suggested the intervention could take the form of preferentially priced crude for domestic refineries, and warned that any discount on crude would reduce the value accruing to the Federation and consequently the revenue available to the federal, state and local governments. The APC-PCC claimed this could trigger afresh the fiscal crisis that made twenty-seven states unable to pay salaries and pensions before President Tinubu assumed office in 2023. Based on publicly reported refinery throughput and domestic petrol-supply figures, the council estimated that the cost of the new subsidy could run as high as seventeen trillion naira or twenty-one trillion naira annually, depending on the discount size, the volume covered, and whether the support applies to the entire barrel or only to petrol sold domestically. It said these assumptions must be clearly defined.
Listing what it described as seven questions Nigerians deserve answers to, the council asked Atiku to state the proposed subsidy rate, the annual spending ceiling, the volume of crude or petrol to be covered, the source of funding, the mechanism guaranteeing lower pump prices, the safeguards against diversion, smuggling and fraudulent claims, and whether amendments to the Petroleum Industry Act would be required. It added that while an appropriation by the National Assembly may authorise expenditure, it would not by itself resolve every regulatory question arising under the PIA. “If Atiku intends to amend the law, he should say so plainly,” the statement said.
The APC-PCC also questioned the consistency of Atiku’s current position with his past support for downstream deregulation. It recalled that in November 2022, at the Lagos Business School, Atiku described the petrol subsidy system as fraudulent and pledged to complete its removal, reminding his audience that he chaired the committee that removed its first and second phases. The council also referred to Atiku’s August 25, 2026 post on X, in which he said, “I will restore it!” It said he must explain why he now advocates restoring subsidy in another form and how his proposed arrangement would avoid the abuse, scarcity, smuggling and fiscal losses associated with the previous regime.
The council contrasted Atiku’s proposal with what it described as the Tinubu administration’s alternative approach, which it said focuses on reducing transportation costs through compressed natural gas and electric mass transit while expanding domestic refining capacity under a deregulated petroleum market. It cited CNG and electric bus services in several states and the Federal Capital Territory as examples of efforts it said were already reducing transport fares, adding that more than 120,000 vehicles had been converted to CNG. The APC-PCC acknowledged the pressure caused by high petrol prices but maintained that any intervention in the downstream sector must be lawful, transparent, properly costed and capable of delivering measurable benefits to consumers. It urged Atiku to publish a detailed policy document alongside independent legal and fiscal analyses of his proposal, saying that until such details were provided, the plan remained an uncosted proposal without a clearly identified legal or operational framework.
The exchange marks the latest escalation in the policy confrontation between the ruling party and the opposition ahead of the 2027 presidential election, scheduled for January 16. Atiku, the presidential candidate of the African Democratic Congress, has made the cost of living and fuel prices central to his campaign, arguing that a production subsidy for locally refined petrol would ease the burden on Nigerians. The APC-PCC’s response signals that the ruling party intends to subject that proposal to rigorous scrutiny, framing it as legally questionable, fiscally reckless and inconsistent with Atiku’s previous positions. For now, the ball is in Atiku’s court. Whether he provides the detailed policy document the APC-PCC has demanded, or dismisses the challenge as political distraction, will shape the next phase of a debate that goes to the heart of Nigeria’s economic policy and the choices facing voters in 2027.
📩 Stone Reporters News | 🌍 stonereportersnews.com
✉️ info@stonereportersnews.com | 📘 Facebook: Stone Reporters News | 🐦 X (Twitter): @StoneReportNew | 📸 Instagram: @stonereportersnews
Add comment
Comments