Nuhu Ribadu has denied calling Tinubu a thief when he was EFCC Chairman.
NewsOnline Nigeria reports that the National Security Adviser, NSA, Mallam Nuhu Ribadu, has debunked the allegation that in his capacity as the chairman of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, EFCC, he labelled President Bola Tinubu, who was then governor of Lagos State, corrupt.
Ribadu’s declaration is a reaction by the leader of Northern Star, Hajia Naja’atu Muhammad, who claimed that the National Security Adviser called Tinubu corrupt while he was still the anti-graft agency boss.
ALSO: EFCC Re-arraigns Agunloye On Seven Amended Charges On Alleged $6bn Fraud
Muhammad also noted that Ribadu has turned around to be the staunchest defender of the President, stating that it is the government’s agenda to silence voices of dissent to the government.
Reacting Ribadu claimed that the claims were malicious and demanded a public apology and retraction within seven days.
The letter reads: “Clearly, in the text of your recording you stated that when our client served as the Chairman of the Economic and Financial Crimes, EFCC, he allegedly named President Bola Tinubu, alongside Sen. George Akume and Sen. Orji Uzor Kalu (all former Governors, and in that order) as the governors in Nigeria who stole the most from the public treasury.
“You also stated that today, our client who once held the above odious view about President Tinubu has turned around to be his staunchest defender; especially, about what you stated to be the government’s agenda to silence voices of dissent to the government, citing the alleged arrest of a certain Prof. Usman Yusuf as an example.
“You also stated that today, our client who once held the above odious view about President Tinubu has turned around to be his staunchest defender; especially, about what you stated to be the government’s agenda to silence voices of dissent to the government, citing the alleged arrest of a certain Prof. Usman Yusuf as an example.
“You also stated that our client’s alleged attitudinal change towards President Tinubu means that he has either become a liar or that he lied when he allegedly described President Tinubu, Sen. Akume, Sen. Kalu and other governors as thieves.
“Privately or publicly, our client has never expressed the above viewpoint about President Tinubu and/or Senators George Akume and Orji Uzor Kalu, which you attributed to him.
“In fact, our client has never held such a viewpoint about the President; hence, it came as a complete surprise to him when his attention was drawn to the aforesaid publication by you against him.
“In fact, our client has never held such a viewpoint about the President; hence, it came as a complete surprise to him when his attention was drawn to the aforesaid publication by you against him.
“In the foregoing premise, our client hereby challenges you to provide evidence of your allegations therein against him; which have cast him as double-faced, duplicitous and deceitful in the eyes of right-thinking members of the society.
“Although masked as a clarion call to the North to rise up to your perceived injustice against the North by the government of the day, your publication is also inciteful of violence towards our client. Given this far-reaching ramification of your publication, our client will not sit back and watch his hard-earned reputation and goodwill destroyed.
“Although masked as a clarion call to the North to rise up to your perceived injustice against the North by the government of the day, your publication is also inciteful of violence towards our client. Given this far-reaching ramification of your publication, our client will not sit back and watch his hard-earned reputation and goodwill destroyed by your malicious decision to not only lay false allegations against him, but also, to cause the same to be published for the world’s attention.
“Your intention to bring our client to public ridicule, opprobrium, scorn and shame etc., is laid bare when it is considered that you deliberately caused same to be published on social media, where it has since gone viral.
“Surely, the damage occasioned to our client by your deliberate but ill-advised action is unquantifiable.
“However, our client will be assuaged if you retract the said publication and tender an unreserved public apology to him in at least five national daily newspapers within seven days of receipt of this letter.”
“If not, we have our client’s further instructions to seek redress against you in a court of law where exemplary damages will be claimed against you. Kindly be advised.”
