By Reloaded News Desk
Former South-East spokesperson for President Bola Tinubu’s 2023 presidential campaign, Denge Josef Onoh, has challenged Alwan Hassan, a spokesperson for the All Progressives Congress (APC) Presidential Campaign Council, to provide evidence for his allegation that ministers pay billions of naira to secure appointments.
Onoh described the allegation as damaging to Nigeria’s democratic institutions and international reputation, arguing that such claims should not be used to portray the monetisation of public appointments as an established feature of the country’s political history.
Hassan made the allegation during an interview on Arise Television’s Prime Time programme on Thursday, October 22, while defending Tinubu’s approach to government expenditure.
He claimed that some ministers pay enormous sums to secure appointments and subsequently focus on recovering their financial investments after assuming office.
“A lot of ministers pay billions and billions, and you know, to get themselves appointed. The first thing they think of is how to recoup that money,” Hassan said.
He maintained that the alleged practice predated the APC, arguing that corruption involving ministers had persisted across successive administrations.
However, Hassan did not identify any minister who allegedly paid for an appointment, name any recipient of the purported payments or present documentary evidence to substantiate the claim during the interview.
Reacting in a statement made available to journalists in Lagos, Onoh said Hassan’s remarks required clarification, particularly because they appeared to implicate successive Nigerian administrations in the alleged sale of ministerial positions.
Onoh challenged Hassan to identify the individuals involved, the intermediaries who allegedly facilitated the transactions, the amounts paid and the dates on which the payments were made.
He argued that without verifiable evidence, claims that ministers bought their appointments under previous governments should not be treated as established facts.
According to Onoh, allegations of this magnitude should be supported by evidence rather than used to suggest that corruption in public appointments has always been the norm.
He also argued that if Hassan possessed credible information about payments made to secure appointments, the allegations should be properly documented and referred to the appropriate authorities for investigation.
Onoh particularly defended the administration of former President Olusegun Obasanjo, describing its cabinet as an example of merit-based appointments and technocratic leadership.
He maintained that Obasanjo assembled individuals with strong professional credentials and administrative experience to manage the country’s affairs following the end of military rule in 1999.
Onoh attributed several major developments during the period to the administration’s approach to governance, including Nigeria’s external debt relief, banking-sector reforms, telecommunications expansion and the establishment of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) and the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC).
He insisted that no minister appointed under Obasanjo paid money to obtain a cabinet position, challenging former ministers from successive administrations between 1999 and 2023 to state whether they had purchased their appointments.
His claims about the integrity of past appointments, however, remain Onoh’s position. Establishing whether payments were made to secure particular appointments would require evidence relating to the individuals and transactions concerned.
Onoh argued that public allegations suggesting ministerial positions are sold to the highest bidder could undermine confidence in Nigeria’s institutions and raise concerns among foreign investors, international financial institutions and diplomatic partners.
He also described the remarks as an insult to Nigerians, arguing that public appointments should be based on competence, integrity and commitment to national service rather than financial influence.
The former campaign spokesperson questioned the discipline and coordination within the current presidential campaign structure, arguing that allegations of this nature from a campaign representative could undermine the administration’s efforts to defend its record.
He further maintained that the allegation, if substantiated as a description of the current administration’s appointment process, would raise serious questions about the integrity of public appointments and the government’s commitment to accountability.
Onoh called on President Tinubu to address the controversy and restore public confidence in the appointment process.
He urged the President to undertake a comprehensive review of the Federal Executive Council and replace any appointees found to lack the competence and integrity required for public office.
Onoh argued that Nigerians should not be expected to accept a system in which public office is allegedly treated as a financial investment to be recovered through access to public resources.
He also warned that unresolved concerns about the integrity of public appointments could become an issue in the 2027 general election.
Hassan’s remarks have raised questions about transparency in ministerial appointments and the safeguards against financial inducement in public office.
Under Section 147 of the 1999 Constitution, the President nominates ministers, subject to confirmation by the Senate. Any credible allegation that money changes hands to secure ministerial appointments would therefore raise questions about the integrity of the appointment process and the conduct of anyone involved.
However, the allegation made during the television interview does not, by itself, establish that any particular minister paid for an appointment or engaged in corruption.
Hassan has not publicly identified the alleged beneficiaries or recipients of the payments in the reported interview, and the specific claims remain unsubstantiated.
Onoh’s challenge places the focus on the evidence behind the allegation: who allegedly paid, who received the money, and what records or witnesses could establish that the transactions occurred.
A clear explanation from Hassan, supported by verifiable evidence where available, would help Nigerians assess the allegation and determine whether it warrants a formal investigation.
Reloaded News — NEWS THAT INFORMS. MEDIA THAT TRANSFORMS
