
Former Vice President Atiku Abubakar has launched a sharp criticism against the federal government, accusing it of turning poverty into a political tool through the distribution of food palliatives across Northern Nigeria.
His position was conveyed in a statement issued on Friday by his media aide, Phrank Shaibu, on Workers’ Day, where he condemned what he described as “the weaponization of hunger” under the current administration.
Atiku’s remarks were triggered by the recent flag-off of 100 trucks of rice and ₦1.2 billion in relief materials by First Lady Oluremi Tinubu, an initiative meant for distribution across northern states and the Federal Capital Territory.
He argued that the exercise reflects what he called a “political performance staged on the altar of mass hardship,” rather than a genuine solution to Nigeria’s deepening economic crisis.
According to him, millions of Nigerians are currently battling rising inflation, declining purchasing power, and worsening living conditions, while the government focuses on publicised distribution events instead of structural reforms.
“What Nigerians are witnessing today is the tragic normalization of poverty under the administration of President Bola Ahmed Tinubu,” he said, blaming policy failures for worsening economic hardship.
He further alleged that insecurity has severely affected agriculture in the northern region, forcing farmers off their land and weakening food production and supply chains.
Atiku warned that continued neglect of rural security and agricultural productivity is worsening food insecurity and increasing dependence on emergency interventions.
He also criticised what he described as the politicisation of relief efforts, arguing that food distribution should not be turned into a tool for political messaging or branding.
“It is even more troubling that this pattern did not begin today,” he said, referencing previous food distribution exercises that involved political figures and public campaigns.
Atiku maintained that Nigerians are not beneficiaries of charity, but citizens entitled to policies that ensure sustainable food security, economic stability, and dignity.
The controversy adds to ongoing political debate over rising living costs and the government’s response to economic pressure across the country.