Atiku Abubakar's proposal to restore petrol subsidy if elected president in 2027 has come under fresh criticism, with Gloria Adebajo-Fraser questioning the economic sustainability of the plan.
Adebajo-Fraser, President of The National Patriots, made the argument in a response to Professor Farooq Kperogi's recent defence of Atiku's position on petrol subsidy.
She argued that while Atiku had presented more details than a simple promise to restore subsidy, the proposal still lacked critical information about its cost and funding.
According to her, Atiku needs to explain how much the proposed subsidy would cost, who would benefit from it and how the government would finance the policy.
Atiku has proposed supplying qualifying Nigerian refineries with crude oil at preferential prices, subject to domestic production and supply conditions.
He has also proposed a fixed annual ceiling, traceability mechanisms and penalties for diversion.
Adebajo-Fraser, however, argued that describing the policy as capped was insufficient without revealing the actual financial limit.
She noted that selling crude below its market value would still amount to a subsidy because the government would be giving up potential revenue.
She also questioned whether discounted crude supplied to refineries would necessarily translate into lower petrol prices for consumers.
According to her, refinery costs, financing, transportation, distribution expenses and retail margins could still prevent consumers from receiving the full benefit of cheaper crude.
She therefore called for transparent refinery accounts, an enforceable pricing formula and independent verification of retail prices.
Adebajo-Fraser also argued that a general petrol subsidy could disproportionately benefit wealthier Nigerians who consume more fuel through private vehicles and generators.
She suggested that targeted interventions in areas such as transportation, healthcare, food security and electricity could provide more effective support for vulnerable Nigerians.
The debate comes after the removal of petrol subsidy under President Bola Tinubu triggered a sharp rise in transportation and living costs, intensifying public criticism of the economic reform.
Adebajo-Fraser acknowledged the hardship caused by the reform but argued that implementation problems did not necessarily mean Nigeria should return to the previous subsidy system.
She said the government's failure to establish adequate social safety nets alongside the reforms contributed to the severity of the cost-of-living crisis.
She cited targeted support programmes in countries such as Indonesia and Egypt as examples of how governments can combine subsidy reforms with measures designed to protect vulnerable households.
The article also acknowledged that Nigeria's economy has recorded some improvements following the reforms, including stronger government revenue and economic growth, while stressing that many citizens have yet to feel sufficient relief.
Adebajo-Fraser argued that both realities can exist at the same time, with macroeconomic improvements occurring alongside serious pressure on household finances.
She also challenged the idea that increased allocations to state governments automatically translate into improved living conditions for citizens.
Instead, she advocated a dedicated infrastructure and social relief mechanism that would channel part of the government's additional revenue into visible interventions.
The debate has added another dimension to the growing economic arguments surrounding the 2027 presidential election.
Atiku's proposed return to fuel subsidy is likely to remain a major campaign issue as Nigerians weigh the immediate need for cheaper petrol against concerns about government revenue and long-term fiscal sustainability.
Adebajo-Fraser concluded that Atiku would need to publish clearer figures on the proposed crude discount, annual cost, funding source, refinery eligibility and retail-price mechanism before the proposal could be considered a fully developed economic programme.
The controversy therefore shifts the focus from whether Nigerians want cheaper petrol to a more fundamental question of how such relief would be financed and delivered without recreating the weaknesses of the former subsidy regime.