In a strongly worded statement, the Presidency has issued a caution to former President Goodluck Jonathan, urging him to abandon any aspirations of returning to Aso Rock, Nigeria’s presidential seat, in the 2027 general elections. The statement, released on Monday by Bayo Onanuga, Special Adviser to President Bola Tinubu on Information and Strategy, emphasized that Nigerians are unlikely to forgive what it described as the “economic ruin and mismanagement” that characterized Jonathan’s six-year presidency from 2010 to 2015. While acknowledging Jonathan’s constitutional right to contest for office, the Presidency warned that he would face not only legal scrutiny over his eligibility but also the judgment of voters who, it claims, remain disillusioned by his administration’s record of “squandered oil wealth, depleted reserves, and reckless governance.”
The statement comes amid growing speculation about Jonathan’s political intentions, with some reports suggesting that the former president may be considering a comeback in 2027. The Presidency’s remarks reflect a broader effort to draw a sharp contrast between the current administration’s policies under President Tinubu and what it portrays as the failures of Jonathan’s tenure. By invoking the memory of economic hardship during Jonathan’s presidency, the Tinubu administration appears to be preemptively shaping the narrative ahead of the next electoral cycle, positioning itself as the antidote to the challenges inherited from previous governments.
A Critique of Jonathan’s Economic Legacy
The Presidency’s statement was unrelenting in its critique of Jonathan’s economic record, accusing his administration of plunging Nigeria into financial distress despite enjoying unprecedented oil revenues. According to Onanuga, when Jonathan assumed office in 2010, he inherited foreign reserves of $66 billion, bolstered by excess crude savings. However, by the time he left office in 2015, these reserves had dwindled to less than $32 billion. The statement attributed this decline to what it called “frivolous spending, fuel subsidy fraud, and diversions of security funds,” which it claimed pushed the Nigerian economy to the brink of collapse.
During Jonathan’s presidency, Nigeria experienced a period of high global oil prices, which should have translated into robust economic growth and fiscal stability. Instead, the Presidency alleged that his administration mismanaged these resources, leaving the country vulnerable to economic shocks. The statement highlighted specific issues, such as the mismanagement of the fuel subsidy regime, which it described as riddled with corruption and inefficiencies. It also pointed to the diversion of funds meant for security, which exacerbated Nigeria’s challenges in combating insurgency, particularly in the Northeast, where Boko Haram gained significant ground during Jonathan’s tenure.
The economic fallout from these policies, according to the Presidency, was severe. By 2015, many state governments were unable to pay salaries, leaving civil servants and public workers in financial distress. The depletion of reserves also limited Nigeria’s ability to respond to external economic pressures, such as fluctuations in global oil prices. Onanuga argued that these failures culminated in Jonathan’s electoral defeat in 2015, when Nigerians voted him out in favor of Muhammadu Buhari, signaling their dissatisfaction with his leadership.
“Jonathan and his PDP allies broke the economy,” Onanuga declared, framing the former president’s tenure as a cautionary tale of governance gone awry. The statement suggested that Nigerians’ memories of this period remain vivid and would influence their voting decisions in 2027, should Jonathan choose to run.
Tinubu’s Reforms and Economic Recovery
In contrast to Jonathan’s record, the Presidency sought to highlight the achievements of President Tinubu’s administration, which it claimed has made significant strides in reversing Nigeria’s economic fortunes. Onanuga pointed to a series of reforms introduced since Tinubu took office in 2023, which he argued have begun to yield tangible results. Among these reforms are the removal of the fuel subsidy, the unification of Nigeria’s multiple exchange rates, and policies designed to restore investor confidence in the economy.
The fuel subsidy, long a contentious issue in Nigeria, was described as a drain on national resources, with successive administrations struggling to address its inefficiencies and associated corruption. Tinubu’s decision to eliminate the subsidy was a bold and controversial move, as it led to an immediate increase in fuel prices and sparked public discontent. However, the Presidency argued that this reform was necessary to free up resources for critical investments in infrastructure, healthcare, and education. By redirecting funds previously spent on subsidies, the government claims it has been able to prioritize long-term development goals.
The unification of exchange rates was another key policy highlighted in the statement. Prior to Tinubu’s presidency, Nigeria operated a complex system of multiple exchange rates, which created distortions in the foreign exchange market and discouraged foreign investment. The decision to unify these rates was aimed at creating a more transparent and market-driven system, which the Presidency claims has begun to restore confidence among investors. According to Onanuga, these reforms have contributed to a notable improvement in Nigeria’s economic indicators.
The statement cited specific data to support its claims of economic recovery. It noted that Nigeria’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP) grew by 4.23% in the second quarter of 2025, marking a significant improvement from previous years. Inflation, which had been a persistent challenge, was reported to have dropped to its lowest level in three years, providing relief to consumers and businesses alike. Additionally, foreign reserves had climbed to $42 billion, signaling a strengthening of Nigeria’s external position.
“President Tinubu has turned the corner,” Onanuga asserted, presenting these achievements as evidence of effective leadership and sound economic management. The Presidency’s narrative is clear: Tinubu’s reforms have set Nigeria on a path to recovery, in stark contrast to the economic mismanagement attributed to Jonathan’s administration.
Legal and Political Challenges for Jonathan
While the Presidency acknowledged Jonathan’s constitutional right to contest the 2027 elections, it raised questions about his eligibility and political viability. Legally, Jonathan’s ability to run for president again has been a subject of debate due to Nigeria’s constitutional provisions on presidential term limits. The 1999 Constitution limits presidents to a maximum of two four-year terms, whether consecutive or non-consecutive. Jonathan served one full term from 2011 to 2015 and a partial term from 2010 to 2011, following the death of President Umaru Yar’Adua. Some legal experts argue that this partial term counts toward his limit, potentially barring him from running again, while others contend that he remains eligible for one more term.
The Presidency’s statement alluded to this legal ambiguity, noting that Jonathan would face “legal scrutiny” over his eligibility. However, it placed greater emphasis on the political challenges he would encounter, particularly the “verdict of voters” on his past performance. Onanuga’s remarks suggested that Jonathan’s record would be a significant liability, as Nigerians are unlikely to forget the economic hardships they experienced under his leadership.
The statement also framed Jonathan’s potential candidacy as a test of his popularity, but one that he is unlikely to pass. “Jonathan is free to test his popularity in 2027, but Nigerians will not forget how he failed them,” Onanuga declared. This rhetoric underscores the Presidency’s strategy of leveraging public discontent with Jonathan’s tenure to undermine any political comeback.
Political Context and Implications
The Presidency’s statement must be understood within the broader context of Nigeria’s political landscape as the 2027 elections approach. With Tinubu’s first term nearing its midpoint, his administration is keen to consolidate its achievements and build a compelling case for his re-election. By drawing a contrast with Jonathan’s presidency, the Tinubu administration is not only targeting a potential rival but also reinforcing its narrative of economic recovery and reform.
Jonathan, for his part, has remained relatively quiet about his political ambitions, focusing instead on his role as a statesman and international mediator. Since leaving office, he has been involved in peacebuilding efforts across Africa, earning praise for his diplomatic work. However, his name continues to surface in political discussions, fueled by nostalgia among some Nigerians who view his presidency as a period of relative stability compared to subsequent years.
The Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), under which Jonathan served as president, remains a significant opposition force, despite internal divisions. The Presidency’s reference to “Jonathan and his PDP allies” suggests an attempt to tie him to the broader failures of the PDP’s 16-year rule from 1999 to 2015. This framing could be an effort to weaken the opposition by reminding voters of past grievances while positioning Tinubu’s All Progressives Congress (APC) as the party of progress and reform.
Economic Challenges and Public Sentiment
While the Presidency’s statement paints an optimistic picture of Tinubu’s economic reforms, it is worth noting that these policies have not been without controversy. The removal of the fuel subsidy, for instance, led to a sharp increase in the cost of living, with fuel prices rising significantly and affecting transportation, food, and other essential goods. The unification of exchange rates, while aimed at stabilizing the economy, initially caused volatility in the foreign exchange market, leading to a depreciation of the naira and higher import costs.
These challenges have fueled public discontent, with protests and strikes occurring in response to rising prices and economic hardship. The Presidency’s claim of declining inflation and GDP growth may reflect positive trends, but these improvements have yet to translate into tangible benefits for many Nigerians, particularly those in lower-income brackets. This gap between macroeconomic indicators and lived experiences could complicate Tinubu’s efforts to convince voters of his administration’s success.
For Jonathan, the economic struggles of the present could provide an opening, as some Nigerians may look back on his presidency with a degree of nostalgia. However, the Presidency’s statement seeks to counter this by reminding voters of the economic difficulties that marked the end of his tenure, including unpaid salaries and depleted reserves.
Looking Ahead to 2027
As the 2027 elections draw closer, the political landscape in Nigeria is likely to become increasingly competitive. The Presidency’s preemptive strike against Jonathan suggests that Tinubu’s administration is preparing for a contentious campaign, with efforts to define potential opponents early. By framing Jonathan as a symbol of past failures, the administration hopes to neutralize any momentum he might gain.
At the same time, Jonathan’s decision to run—if he chooses to do so—will depend on a range of factors, including his assessment of his political capital, the state of the PDP, and the broader national mood. His international stature and reputation as a conciliatory figure could appeal to voters seeking stability, but the legal and political hurdles outlined by the Presidency present significant challenges.
For now, the Presidency’s statement serves as a warning shot, signaling that any attempt by Jonathan to return to Aso Rock will be met with fierce resistance. Whether this strategy will succeed in shaping public opinion remains to be seen, but it underscores the high stakes of the 2027 elections and the intense political maneuvering already underway.
In conclusion, the Presidency’s caution to Jonathan reflects a calculated effort to undermine a potential rival while reinforcing Tinubu’s narrative of economic recovery. By contrasting the current administration’s reforms with the alleged failures of Jonathan’s presidency, the statement seeks to rally public support for Tinubu’s leadership. However, as Nigeria navigates ongoing economic challenges and political uncertainties, the road to 2027 promises to be fraught with contention, with the verdict of voters ultimately determining the country’s path forward.