Ribadu’s Denial: A Tale of Political Survival and Shifting Allegiances
In a dramatic turn of events that highlights the complex nature of Nigerian politics, National Security Adviser Nuhu Ribadu has found himself at the center of a controversy that questions his integrity and political consistency.
Ribadu, once the feared chairman of the EFCC, is now vehemently denying allegations made by Northern Star leader Hajia Naja’atu Muhammad that he previously accused President Bola Tinubu of corruption. The irony of his current position as Tinubu’s NSA hasn’t escaped public attention.
Through his lawyer’s strongly-worded letter, Ribadu demands a public apology and threatens legal action against Muhammad. However, this defensive stance raises questions about political loyalty in Nigeria’s power circles. The transition from anti-corruption crusader to high-ranking government official under a president he allegedly once investigated deserves scrutiny.
Muhammad’s allegations, while unproven, touch on a sensitive issue in Nigerian politics – the apparent flexibility of political principles. Ribadu’s legal team’s characterization of the accusations as “inciteful of violence” seems to deflect from the core issue of political integrity.
The demand for a retraction in five national newspapers and the threat of legal action appears more focused on damage control than addressing the substantive question of political consistency. This episode serves as a mirror to the broader pattern of political realignments in Nigeria, where yesterday’s critics often become today’s allies.
As this drama unfolds, the public is left to ponder: In Nigerian politics, does principle truly matter, or is it all about power and position?
Reference
Ribadu’s Denial: A Tale of Political Survival and Shifting Allegiances