Former Vice President Atiku Abubakar and former Anambra State Governor Peter Obi have demanded full accountability from the federal government following IMF-linked reports alleging unreported public spending of about 2% of Nigeria's gross domestic product. According to Channels Television, the two prominent figures responded to the reports by pressing for clarity on how such spending occurred and by insisting that the authorities owe Nigerians a transparent explanation of the country's public finances.
Atiku Abubakar called on the EFCC, the ICPC, the National Assembly and the Auditor General to investigate claims of off-budget spending estimated at 8.8 trillion naira. By naming several of the country's principal oversight and anti-corruption bodies at once, the former vice president framed the matter as one that requires a coordinated institutional response rather than a single inquiry, arguing that the scale of the figure involved demands a thorough and independent examination.
Beyond the headline figure, Atiku Abubakar also raised concerns over alleged additional deductions from statutory allocations, a reference to the funds that are constitutionally due to different tiers and arms of government. He insisted on transparency ahead of future elections, tying the demand for openness in public spending to the broader question of trust in the electoral and governance process, and suggesting that unexplained deductions could undermine confidence if left unaddressed.
Peter Obi reacted in strong terms, describing the IMF report as evidence of grand corruption and serious fiscal mismanagement. The former Anambra State governor called for urgent accountability and even leadership responsibility, language that pushed the debate beyond technical budgeting questions and toward the conduct of those at the top of government. His intervention added a sharper political edge to the controversy, casting the reported discrepancies as a failure of stewardship rather than a mere accounting oversight.
The IMF, for its part, reportedly linked the discrepancies to projects executed outside formal budget processes. That characterization points to spending that took place without passing through the normal appropriation and approval channels, a practice that makes public expenditure harder to track and to audit. The framing helps explain why the two opposition figures have focused their demands on the institutions responsible for scrutinizing how public money is authorized and accounted for.
Rather than simply criticizing the government, the IMF also urged reforms and improved transparency in fiscal reporting. That recommendation shifts part of the conversation toward remedies, suggesting that clearer disclosure and tighter budget discipline could prevent similar questions from arising in future. It also gives weight to the calls by Atiku Abubakar and Peter Obi, since it frames better reporting not as a partisan demand but as a measure endorsed by an external financial institution.
Taken together, the interventions by two of Nigeria's most prominent opposition voices have turned the reported figures into a live question of public accountability. The demands place pressure on the named institutions to respond and on the federal government to account for the spending that the reports have flagged. With transparency in public finances now firmly on the agenda, the coming weeks are likely to test whether the calls for investigation translate into concrete action and a clearer picture for the Nigerian public.