The Presidency has gone on the offensive. In a statement, Bayo Onanuga signed as the Special Adviser to the President on Information and Strategy. Mr Onanuga said former president Goodluck Jonathan is free to contest the 2027 poll. He warned that Nigerians will not forget what he called Jonathan’s dismal record in office.
The statement was blunt. It was politically theatrical. It was released after a public appeal by Professor Jerry Gana. The appeal suggested that the Peoples Democratic Party might field Mr Jonathan as its standard bearer. The presidency described that idea as political fantasy and a return to what it called 16 years of PDP misrule.
This report tests the Presidency’s allegations against the public record. It checks numbers, timelines and the weight of historical evidence. It asks whether the broadbrush accusations are documentary fact or partisan theatre.
The answers matter. That judgment will shape how Nigerians read any future presidential pitch from Mr Jonathan. It will also influence how the electorate judges the Tinubu administration’s counterclaims.
What the presidency said and what can be verified
Mr Onanuga made four central claims that the Presidency wants to lodge against Mr Jonathan. They are worth listing plainly because each can be tested against publicly available data
- Jonathan inherited large reserves and an Excess Crude Account but left the country with much less by 2015.
- His administration engaged in fiscal profligacy and failed to pay some salaries by late 2014 while many states carried arrears.
- Security funds were mismanaged under the Dasuki axis.
- The Tinubu administration has stabilised the economy by implementing bold reforms. This is evident from the 2025 Q2 GDP growth. Inflation is easing, and foreign exchange buffers are rising as proof.
Reserve levels and the ECA
Onanuga stated that Mr Jonathan “inherited $66bn in 2010, $46bn in reserves, and $20bn in the Excess Crude Account.” By 2015, he left “less than $30bn in reserves and only $2bn in the ECA.” Those exact figures have circulated in political messaging before. But independent checks show the headline numbers are misleading.
Nigeria’s gross external reserves in mid 2010 were around $40bn, not $66bn, according to Central Bank and archival data. Scholarly and official accounting indicate lower documented levels of externally held buffers and ECA. These are lower than the numbers recycled in partisan briefings. \
Fact checks have examined viral claims about the size of reserves in 2010 and 2015. These checks conclude that the assertion Mr. Jonathan presided over a fall from $66bn to under $30bn is inaccurate. The claim is not framed correctly.
Instead, the better supported timeline shows reserves near $40–43bn in 2010. It shows roughly $28–30bn in 2015 when the administration left power. The figures depend on whether one counts gross or net reserves. They also depend on the accounting conventions used by the Central Bank.
The verdict is that Onanuga’s $66bn figure conflates different assets and is not supported by official time series.
That said the reserves did decline during Mr Jonathan’s tenure, particularly after the 2014 oil price crash. The decline is real. The debate is over magnitudes and attribution.
External shocks played a role. The fall in oil prices in 2014 also had an impact. Balance sheet effects at the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation contributed as well. Policy choices also contributed. But the Presidency’s rounded, larger figure is not a neat documentary fact.
Salaries, arrears and fiscal strain in 2014
Contemporaneous reporting supports the claim that federal and state governments faced salary pressures in late 2014. This continued into 2015. By the end of 2014, several states reported arrears. The Federal Government acknowledged fiscal strain, which was brought on by falling oil revenues.
The Treasury and Finance Ministry at the time disputed claims that resources had been “squandered” but confirmed financial pressure. So the Presidency’s rhetorical framing that workers and states faced arrears is historically precise though contested in the finer points.
Dasuki and the security funds charge
The Presidency accused Jonathan of distributing security funds freely. Colonel Sambo Dasuki, his then National Security Adviser, also distributed these funds to friends and cronies. That controversy is the subject of the widely publicised Dasuki investigations and prosecutions that emerged after 2015.
Nigerian investigative committees and subsequent criminal charges alleged widespread diversion of funds from the office of the NSA. Dasuki has faced prosecutions and much of the raw allegation is a matter of public court record and reporting.
Whether Mr Jonathan personally authorised criminal misdirection remains politically contested. The Dasuki matter is a political scar on the Jonathan era. The prosecution remains a live matter in the public mind.
The Tinubu contrast: growth, inflation and reserves
To bolster its political case the Presidency points to macro numbers since 2023. It highlights a 4.23 per cent GDP expansion in 2025 Q2, easing inflation to about 20.12 per cent in August 2025 and a recovery in foreign exchange buffers, figures that are confirmed by independent reporting.
International outlets and Nigeria’s statistics authority have documented the bounce in Q2 2025. They have also noted the easing inflation trend after 2024’s high rates.
Whether these figures represent durable improvement for ordinary Nigerians is another question. Growth driven by higher oil output and statistical rebasing can coexist with persistent cost of living pressures and jobless growth.
The Presidency’s claims on the headline statistics are therefore supported by the available evidence. However, the political meaning attached to them is not settled.
Context and comparison
History rarely fits the tidy narratives released in press statements. Two short contextual points matter.
First, the fall in reserves and fiscal stress in the early 2010s occurred. This followed a global oil shock in 2014. The shock slashed revenues across oil-producing countries.
Nigeria’s macro performance then was affected by that shock. Structural weaknesses inside the oil sector also had an impact. These weaknesses predated and outlived any single administration. Blaming one man for systemic vulnerability simplifies a complex story.
Second, the Tinubu administration’s economic record is young. Bold reforms such as fuel subsidy removal and exchange rate unification have real effects. These reforms also have immediate costs for households.
The Presidency’s focus on highways, loan facilities for infrastructure, and headline economic indicators is defensible. Projects such as the Lagos Calabar Coastal Highway have attracted major financing and publicity.
Infrastructure announcements and early commissioning of small sections do not substitute for long-term growth. Inclusive growth remains the yardstick that most voters will use in 2027.
Verdict and implications for 2027
The Presidency’s statement is a political strike. It contains elements of verified fact. It also uses rounded and disputed figures. These figures create a simple moral ledger against Mr Jonathan. The most load bearing factual claims about GDP growth, easing inflation and large infrastructure financing are supported by independent sources.
The harsher numerical claims about what Mr Jonathan “inherited” appear exaggerated. They may also be conflated with other balances. These claims should be treated with caution.
The Dasuki affair remains a historical blot. It will be dredged up in a campaign. Legal responsibility and political responsibility are not identical.
For voters the practical question is not only who did what in the past but who offers credible solutions now. If Mr Jonathan seeks to run, his campaign will be measured in two ways. It needs to answer the structural failures of the 2010s with new policy architecture. It should not rely on nostalgic appeals.
If the Tinubu camp wants to continue the argument about stewardship, it must ensure its record can withstand scrutiny. The record must hold up beyond headline growth and project ribbon cuttings.
The Presidency has opened a political front against a possible Jonathan comeback. The facts show both that Mr Jonathan’s era suffered real pain and that the Presidency’s numerical case is sometimes clumsy. That ambiguity is fuel for an explosive 2027 contest where memory, numbers and narrative will collide.
Follow us on our broadcast channels today!
- WhatsApp: https://whatsapp.com/channel/0029VawZ8TbDDmFT1a1Syg46
- Telegram: https://t.me/atlanticpostchannel
- Facebook: https://www.messenger.com/channel/atlanticpostng
