A chieftain of the All Progressives Congress, APC, in Osun State, Olatunbosun Oyintiloye, has accused opposition politicians of recycling allegations against President Bola Tinubu ahead of the 2027 general elections.

Oyintiloye, who made the allegation while speaking with journalists in Osogbo on Sunday, described claims that the United States had reopened a drug-trafficking case against Tinubu as political propaganda.

He warned opposition leaders against spreading false claims, saying there was no evidence that any United States court had reopened or ordered a criminal retrial against the President.
The former lawmaker also stated that no American judge had pronounced Tinubu guilty of drug trafficking, urging Nigerians to distinguish between allegations, investigations and criminal convictions.

According to him, “the controversy currently generating public debate concerns a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit seeking access to records held by United States law-enforcement agencies.”

He explained that the FOIA matter should not be confused with a criminal prosecution or judicial proceeding against the President.

“An FOIA case is about access to government records. It is not a criminal trial, a retrial or a judicial declaration of guilt,” Oyintiloye said.

The APC chieftain said the existence of records held by agencies such as the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) or the Drug Enforcement Administration, DEA, did not, on its own, establish criminality.

He added that investigative records could contain unproven allegations, leads or information supplied by third parties without constituting proof of guilt.

Oyintiloye also referred to FOIA Exemption 7(C), which provides protection for certain law-enforcement information where disclosure could amount to an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

He therefore urged Nigerians and the media to avoid what he called trial by document, stressing the need to establish the context and legal status of information contained in government records.

The former lawmaker said the controversy formed part of what he described as a recurring pattern of allegations against Tinubu, particularly at critical points in his political career.
He noted that the President had spent decades in Nigeria’s political space and had faced several controversies, including debates over his academic credentials during his two-term tenure as Lagos State Governor between 1999 and 2007.

Oyintiloye said similar allegations resurfaced during the 2023 presidential campaign, accusing opposition elements of recycling claims bordering on certificate forgery, criminality and drug trafficking instead of focusing on governance.

He challenged opposition politicians to present credible alternatives through policies and programmes capable of improving the lives of Nigerians.

“Privacy is not a crime. An investigation is not a conviction. A document is not automatically a fact simply because it bears the seal of a government agency,” he said.

Oyintiloye urged politicians to move beyond personality attacks and campaigns of calumny, saying Nigerians should assess political parties and candidates based on their ideas, manifestos, records and performance.

“The opposition should tell us their manifesto, not blackmail. Tell Nigerians what you have on the table and why they should vote for you,” he said.

A legal practitioner, Obere A. Kana, Esq., has declared the Social Democratic Party (SDP) governorship primary election conducted in Nasarawa State on September 5, 2026, invalid, alleging that the exercise contravened key provisions of the Electoral Act, 2026.

Kana, who is an associate of Senator Ahmed Aliyu Wadada, the All Progressives Congress (APC) governorship candidate, made the assertion in a statement issued in Keffi.

He alleged that the SDP violated Sections 33 and 82(1) of the Electoral Act in the process leading to the conduct of the primary.

According to Kana, the party had initially submitted Musa Adamu Angba’s name to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) as its governorship candidate pursuant to Section 29(1) of the Act, after which the Commission published Angba’s particulars on August 29, 2026, in accordance with Section 29(3).

Kana, however, said Angba had earlier withdrawn his candidature through an affidavit sworn before the Federal High Court in Abuja on June 10, 2026, reportedly in favour of Mohammed Abubakar Adamu.

He argued that Section 33 of the Electoral Act requires a political party to conduct a fresh primary within 14 days of a candidate’s withdrawal in order to nominate and submit a replacement.

Kana maintained that the SDP’s decision to conduct its replacement primary on September 5, more than 14 days after the alleged withdrawal, amounted to a breach of the statutory requirement and rendered the exercise “null and void ab initio.”

He also challenged the notice given by the party to INEC ahead of the primary, citing Section 82(1), which requires political parties to notify the Commission at least 21 days before conducting primaries.

He said the SDP’s notice, dated August 24, 2026, for a primary scheduled for September 5, provided only 13 days’ notice.

Citing Section 82(6), Kana argued that failure to comply with the mandatory notice requirement invalidates the primary.

He further referenced Section 88(3), which, according to him, prevents a candidate produced through such an invalid process from contesting the election.

“There are various precedents decided by superior courts on this,” Kana said, insisting that the alleged breaches raise significant legal questions over the validity of the SDP primary and the candidacy of its eventual flag bearer.

He urged stakeholders to examine the circumstances surrounding the primary in light of the relevant provisions of the Electoral Act and existing judicial precedents.