President Bola Tinubu’s decision to extend his working vacation in Europe by a few days, while Vice-President Kashim Shettima represents Nigeria at the 81st United Nations General Assembly in New York, has intensified debate over the President’s repeated absence from the annual gathering.
The Presidency announced on Monday that Tinubu, who departed Nigeria on August 30 for a working vacation in London before moving to Paris, would return to Nigeria at the weekend. Shettima, who left Abuja on September 20, is leading Nigeria’s delegation to the UNGA and will deliver the country’s national statement.
The development means Tinubu will not personally attend the 81st UNGA, making this his third consecutive absence from the high-level gathering after Shettima represented him in 2024 and 2025.
Is Tinubu afraid that he could become the next Nicolás Maduro? – Atiku
Former Vice-President Atiku Abubakar has demanded an explanation for Tinubu’s repeated absence, arguing that three consecutive years can no longer be treated as a routine delegation arrangement.
Atiku, in a statement on Sunday, said the UNGA provides presidents with a unique opportunity to defend their countries’ interests, negotiate partnerships, court investors and engage directly with other world leaders.
‘A seat was reportedly secured for Bola near United States President Donald Trump at the world’s most important annual diplomatic gathering. Yet, for the third consecutive year, Tinubu refused to occupy it,’ Atiku said.
He questioned whether Tinubu’s history with US authorities had become a burden on Nigeria’s foreign relations and asked: ‘Is Tinubu afraid that he could become the next Nicolás Maduro?’
Maduro, former Venezuelan president, was abducted from his country by the US military early January over narcotics allegations.
Atiku’s comments have effectively linked the president’s repeated absence to the unresolved political controversy surrounding a 1993 US civil asset-forfeiture case involving funds held in an account in Tinubu’s name.
US court records show that the United States filed a civil forfeiture action in 1993 over funds in accounts associated with Tinubu and others. A settlement resulted in $460,000 being forfeited to the US government. The case was a civil forfeiture proceeding rather than a criminal prosecution, and Tinubu was not convicted of a drug offence in the case, the presidency has maintained.
The matter has nevertheless resurfaced in the political contest ahead of the 2027 election.
A Washington lobbying firm working for Atiku has submitted historical US Department of Justice records relating to the case to members of the Trump administration and Congress, seeking to put the issue back into the US political conversation.
The Presidency has described the renewed attention to the case and suggestions that it influenced Tinubu’s UNGA decision as irresponsible and baseless. It has maintained that the decades-old matter carries no criminal weight.
A diplomatic opportunity lost?
For Nigeria, the controversy goes beyond the President’s personal attendance.
UNGA is one of the few occasions when virtually all world leaders converge in one city, creating opportunities for bilateral meetings, investment discussions, security diplomacy and negotiations with international institutions.
Nigeria is currently seeking greater international cooperation against terrorism, more foreign investment and stronger support for its economic reforms.
It is also attempting to manage its relationship with Washington after a period of heightened tension over religious violence and terrorism.
The two countries have deepened security cooperation, including intelligence sharing and collaboration against terrorist groups in Nigeria and the Lake Chad region.
Tinubu’s administration has also invested heavily in shaping Nigeria’s image in Washington. The Federal Government reportedly engaged DCI Group for $9 million annually to communicate Nigeria’s position on religious freedom and counterterrorism to US policymakers.
The administration’s diplomatic outreach has included First Lady Remi Tinubu’s appearance at the US National Prayer Breakfast earlier this year, where Trump publicly recognised her. Trump has also subsequently praised Tinubu’s leadership in addressing Nigeria’s security challenges.
Against this backdrop, critics argue that Tinubu’s personal presence at UNGA would have offered an important platform to reinforce those diplomatic gains.
But supporters of the President have dismissed the criticism.
Babajide Sanwo-Olu, Lagos State governor, speaking from New York, said there was ‘nothing to worry about’ because Nigeria would be adequately represented.
Tony Elumelu, chairman of Heirs Holdings, also offered a different perspective, arguing that leaders have to prioritise where their presence is most valuable. He noted that leaders could reasonably choose to devote time to domestic problems such as poverty and infrastructure deficits rather than attend every international gathering.
Jimoh Ibrahim, Nigeria’s permanent representative to the UN, similarly said Nigeria would be adequately represented, noting that many countries were represented by vice-presidents or foreign ministers.
Tinubu working remotely – Presidency
The Presidency has also stressed that Tinubu has remained engaged with affairs at home despite being abroad.
According to the State House, he ordered an independent investigation into the deaths of 37 illegal miners in Minna and continued directing government business. The President also held meetings in Paris with French President Emmanuel Macron and businessman Vincent Bolloré during the vacation.
Still, the timing of the extended vacation has added another layer to the debate.
With his return now scheduled for the weekend, Tinubu will remain abroad while the UNGA high-level session takes place in New York.
For his supporters, the arrangement demonstrates that the constitutional structure works: the President can delegate and the Vice-President can represent Nigeria.
For his critics, the third consecutive absence is becoming a pattern that deserves explanation, particularly as Nigeria seeks to project confidence and influence internationally.
The competing interpretations leave Nigeria with a broader diplomatic question: whether presidential presence at UNGA is primarily symbolic or an important instrument of foreign policy.
For now, Shettima has the task of carrying Nigeria’s message to the world. Tinubu, meanwhile, will return to a country already deep in the political preparations for 2027, with the controversy over his repeated absence from one of the world’s most consequential diplomatic gatherings likely to follow him home.