EDITORIAL: OTUARO CALLS HIS CRITICS FRAUDSTERS, BUT WHO IS ANSWERING THE AMNESTY BENEFICIARIES? ₦115 BILLION BUDGET, ₦65,000 STIPEND, UNPAID ARREARS AND A LEADERSHIP THAT MUST BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE!

By Tarakirivoice Newspaper Enterprise | Editorial Desk

There is something profoundly disturbing about an administrator entrusted with managing one of Nigeria’s most sensitive peace-building programmes responding to the cries of aggrieved beneficiaries by describing critics as fraudsters, blackmailers and enemies of reform.

On November 4, 2026, the Presidential Amnesty Programme, through its Special Assistant on Media, Mr Igoniko Oduma, issued a press statement defending the administration of Chief Dennis Brutu Otuaro, PhD. Rather than comprehensively address the grievances surrounding unpaid stipends, outstanding arrears, BVN-related complications, disputed beneficiary accounts and the welfare of former agitators, the statement devoted considerable attention to portraying critics as selfish individuals allegedly opposed to the Administrator’s reforms.

But there is a fundamental question the Amnesty Office appears unwilling to confront:

WHEN BENEFICIARIES COMPLAIN THAT THEIR MONEY HAS NOT BEEN PAID, DOES CALLING THEM FRAUDSTERS SETTLE THEIR ENTITLEMENTS?

When students complain about months of unpaid allowances, does describing their complaints as blackmail put food on their tables?

When former agitators question the continued payment of ₦65,000 monthly stipends despite the reported expansion of the programme’s budget, does accusing their representatives of greed answer the question?

When camp leaders demand clarification over affected accounts and disputed slots, does issuing a press statement resolve their concerns?

Absolutely not!

The November 4 statement may have been intended to protect Otuaro’s reputation, but it has opened an even bigger conversation about leadership, accountability, transparency and the actual condition of the Presidential Amnesty Programme.

At Tarakirivoice, we believe that public office must never become a sanctuary from public scrutiny. An administrator who receives public funds and exercises authority over the livelihoods of thousands of Nigerians must be prepared to answer uncomfortable questions.

The Amnesty Programme belongs to the Federal Government and, ultimately, the Nigerian people. It does not belong to Dennis Otuaro.

OTUARO, BVN IS NOT THE QUESTION. THE QUESTION IS WHY GENUINE BENEFICIARIES ARE STILL SUFFERING!

Let us establish something clearly.

Nobody is arguing that the Federal Government should abandon legitimate financial regulations designed to prevent banking fraud. BVN verification is a legitimate banking and identity-verification mechanism. Government institutions must comply with applicable financial regulations.

However, compliance with BVN regulations does not give any administrator unlimited authority to dismiss beneficiaries’ grievances.

The real question is whether the implementation of these regulations has been fair, transparent, efficient and humane.

What happens to a genuine beneficiary whose account encounters verification problems?

What happens when an approved beneficiary’s account is affected by administrative decisions?

What happens when a person has been recognised by the programme for years but suddenly encounters difficulties accessing an entitlement?

What mechanism exists to resolve such cases?

How many complaints have been received, investigated and resolved?

How many legitimate beneficiaries remain affected?

These are straightforward administrative questions.

Yet the Amnesty Office appears more interested in questioning the motives of those asking them than providing comprehensive answers.

BVN IS A VERIFICATION POLICY, NOT A LICENCE TO ABANDON GENUINE BENEFICIARIES.

If Otuaro’s administration is genuinely committed to sanitising the programme, it should publish clear verification procedures, establish an accessible complaints mechanism and provide timelines for resolving legitimate cases.

Reform without fairness is not good governance.

Verification without accountability is not transparency.

And an administrative process that leaves genuine beneficiaries uncertain about their entitlements deserves serious examination.

₦115 BILLION: WHY IS ₦65,000 STILL THE REALITY FOR BENEFICIARIES?

Perhaps the biggest contradiction confronting the Otuaro administration is the relationship between the reported increase in the programme’s budgetary allocation and the continuing complaints about beneficiary welfare.

The allocation reportedly increased from approximately ₦65 billion to ₦115 billion.

That represents an additional ₦50 billion.

This is public money. It demands public accountability.

Where are the corresponding improvements in the lives of beneficiaries?

Why are complaints about the ₦65,000 monthly stipend still dominating conversations within the Amnesty community?

Why are beneficiaries demanding payment of outstanding entitlements?

Why are some students reportedly complaining about months of unpaid allowances?

Why do administrative and banking disputes continue generating frustration?

If the additional allocation is producing unprecedented transformation, the Amnesty Office should have no difficulty presenting independently verifiable figures demonstrating that progress.

Let us be clear: increasing the programme’s budget does not automatically mean that every beneficiary is entitled to an increase in monthly stipends. However, it creates a legitimate obligation to explain how additional public resources are being utilised and what measurable benefits they have produced.

The Amnesty Office cannot celebrate budgetary expansion as evidence of administrative success while treating questions about beneficiary welfare as blackmail.

The Nigerian public deserves to know how much is allocated to stipends, education, vocational training, overseas scholarships, administration, contractors and other programme activities.

We demand transparency, not propaganda.

13,300 SCHOLARSHIPS: WHERE ARE THE BENEFICIARIES AND THE DOCUMENTS?

The November 4 statement proudly announced that Otuaro had awarded 13,300 onshore and more than 500 offshore scholarships.

It also highlighted aviation training, maritime certification, cadet employment and alternative dispute resolution programmes.

These are important interventions if properly implemented.

Tarakirivoice does not oppose scholarships. We do not oppose vocational training. We do not oppose educational opportunities for Niger Delta youths.

Indeed, these are among the reasons the Amnesty Programme exists.

But public announcements are not substitutes for accountability.

Where is the comprehensive list of the 13,300 scholarship beneficiaries?

Which institutions received the students?

What amounts were approved and disbursed?

How many students have completed their programmes?

How many are currently studying?

How many have been deployed after graduation?

What is the total expenditure on these interventions?

How were beneficiaries selected?

Can independent auditors verify the figures?

The same questions apply to the offshore scholarships, aviation trainees, maritime cadets and other empowerment initiatives advertised by the Amnesty Office.

If these achievements are genuine, publishing verifiable records would strengthen Otuaro’s credibility.

Why should an institution managing billions of naira be uncomfortable with public scrutiny?

The Amnesty Programme must not become a public relations competition in which impressive numbers are announced while the people demanding explanations are portrayed as enemies.

A SCHOLARSHIP FIGURE IS NOT A FINANCIAL AUDIT. A PRESS RELEASE IS NOT PROOF OF TRANSPARENT EXPENDITURE.

THE MOST DISTURBING PART: ARE BENEFICIARIES NOW AFRAID TO QUESTION THE AMNESTY OFFICE?

One of the most troubling aspects of the November 4 statement is its language.

The Amnesty Office described critics as fraudsters, serial blackmailers, misguided elements and individuals who should be under security watch.

These are serious characterisations.

But where is the evidence supporting such sweeping descriptions?

Has every individual complaining about unpaid stipends been investigated and found to be involved in fraud?

Has every camp leader questioning administrative decisions demanded a bogus contract?

Has every beneficiary asking for outstanding payments attempted to manipulate the Amnesty Office?

The answer cannot simply be assumed.

There may be individuals who exploit the Amnesty Programme. There may be questionable claims, fraudulent accounts and people attempting to manipulate the system.

Investigate them.

Expose them.

Prosecute anyone against whom credible evidence establishes wrongdoing.

But do not create an atmosphere in which genuine beneficiaries become afraid that questioning administrative decisions will earn them the label of fraudsters.

A public institution must distinguish between legitimate criticism and criminal conduct.

Otuaro’s administration cannot demand unquestioning loyalty from people whose welfare it is supposed to protect.

The Amnesty Office must understand that beneficiaries are not employees of Dennis Otuaro. They are not his political supporters. They are not obligated to applaud every decision made under his administration.

They have a right to demand explanations.

And they have a right to peaceful protest.

THE ORIGINAL DELEGATES MUST NOT BECOME CASUALTIES OF ADMINISTRATIVE REFORMS.

There is another dimension to this controversy that deserves national attention.

The original Amnesty delegates and camp structures played significant roles in the disarmament and mobilisation process that contributed to the establishment of the programme.

Many of these individuals invested their influence, relationships and personal credibility in persuading former combatants to embrace the Federal Government’s peace initiative.

They helped mobilise people who eventually became beneficiaries of the programme.

Today, some of these individuals are raising concerns about recognition, approved slots, payment arrangements and their treatment under the current administrative structure.

Their complaints deserve an impartial examination.

The Federal Government must establish the historical records of approved beneficiaries, determine the legitimacy of disputed slots and ensure that genuine beneficiaries are not unfairly excluded.

However, let us also make something clear: historical participation must not become a justification for fraudulent claims, multiple payments or diversion of public funds.

Every beneficiary and camp representative must be subjected to transparent and consistent verification.

But verification must be based on records, not intimidation.

The people who helped establish the foundation of the peace process must not be treated as disposable whenever administrative changes are introduced.

FOUR MONTHS OF UNPAID STIPENDS? STUDENTS ARE NOT PROPAGANDA MATERIAL.

Perhaps nothing exposes the human consequences of administrative failure more painfully than the complaints of Amnesty beneficiaries who say their stipends and educational allowances remain outstanding.

In reactions accompanying the November 4 press release, individuals identifying themselves as student beneficiaries complained about four months of unpaid stipends and outstanding allowances.

One beneficiary appealed:

“Pay us our backlog stipends for 4 months as students beneficiaries.”

Another questioned why monthly stipends were consistently delayed.

These are not questions that can be answered by announcing the number of scholarships awarded.

A student cannot pay accommodation expenses with a press release.

A beneficiary cannot settle transportation costs with an announcement about maritime certification.

A family cannot survive on promises of human capital development.

The Amnesty Office must publish a clear payment position showing the number of affected beneficiaries, the outstanding periods, the amounts involved and the proposed settlement dates.

If the claims are inaccurate, publish the payment records.

If they are genuine, pay the outstanding entitlements.

It is that simple.

THE AMNESTY PROGRAMME WAS CREATED TO CHANGE LIVES, NOT TO TURN BENEFICIARIES INTO PERPETUAL BEGGARS FOR THEIR ENTITLEMENTS.

OTUARO MUST ANSWER FOR THE TRUST DEFICIT UNDER HIS LEADERSHIP.

Leadership is not measured by the number of press statements issued in defence of an administrator.

Leadership is measured by results.

A successful administrator should be able to demonstrate that beneficiaries are receiving their legitimate entitlements, educational interventions are producing measurable outcomes, financial records are transparent and administrative complaints are being resolved.

The Otuaro administration must therefore answer a series of fundamental questions:

1. What is the actual number of active and verified Amnesty beneficiaries?
2. How much of the reported ₦115 billion allocation is dedicated to monthly stipends?
3. What is the current payment status of beneficiaries across Phases I, II and III?
4. How many beneficiaries have outstanding stipend arrears, and what is the total amount involved?
5. How many accounts have been affected by BVN-related verification complications?
6. How many previously approved beneficiaries or camp slots have been delisted, and on what documented grounds?
7. What is the independently verifiable expenditure on the announced 13,300 onshore and more than 500 offshore scholarships?
8. How many beneficiaries have completed their training and secured sustainable employment?
9. What is the programme’s total expenditure on administration, contractors, consultants and other service providers?
10. Has the current administration commissioned an independent audit of beneficiary payments and programme expenditure?

These are not questions designed to embarrass Otuaro.

They are questions any responsible public administrator should be prepared to answer.

If his administration has nothing to hide, transparency should be its strongest defence.

PRESIDENT TINUBU, HOW LONG WILL YOU ALLOW THIS CONTROVERSY TO CONTINUE?

President Bola Ahmed Tinubu must now look beyond the official statements coming from the Amnesty Office.

The Presidential Amnesty Programme is too important to the national security and economic stability of Nigeria to be reduced to a public relations battle between an administrator and aggrieved beneficiaries.

The Niger Delta is not merely an oil-producing region.

It is a region whose stability has enormous implications for Nigeria’s economy, energy security and national development.

The Amnesty Programme was established to consolidate peace after years of conflict and insecurity.

That responsibility must never be taken lightly.

Mr President, you cannot continue investing public resources in an institution while allowing serious questions about its administrative performance to remain unanswered.

You must demand an independent examination of Otuaro’s stewardship.

You must demand a comprehensive financial audit.

You must demand the publication of verifiable beneficiary and scholarship records.

You must demand an explanation for outstanding stipend complaints, affected accounts and disputed beneficiary entitlements.

And if the findings establish administrative incompetence, financial misconduct or a persistent inability to restore public confidence, you must not hesitate to remove the Administrator and appoint someone capable of rebuilding trust.

No individual is bigger than the institution he occupies.

No administrator is indispensable.

The credibility of the Presidential Amnesty Programme must be more important than the political comfort of Dennis Otuaro.

TO THE EX-AGITATORS: YOUR SILENCE MUST NOT BE MISTAKEN FOR SATISFACTION.

To the former agitators, original delegates, camp leaders, student beneficiaries and other legitimate stakeholders of the Amnesty Programme, we say this:

Your grievances deserve to be heard.

Your legitimate entitlements deserve protection.

Your questions deserve answers.

You must not allow anyone to convince the Nigerian public that demanding accountability is equivalent to supporting corruption or opposing government reforms.

But your response must be peaceful, organised, lawful and strategic.

If you decide to march on Abuja, let the world see a united community demanding justice through constitutional means.

Carry your documents.

Present your payment records.

Present your evidence of outstanding entitlements.

Demand an independent audit.

Demand a public hearing.

Demand a clear timetable for resolving genuine complaints.

Do not destroy public property. Do not threaten innocent Nigerians. Do not allow political interests or provocateurs to hijack your legitimate grievances.

Your strength lies in your unity, evidence and discipline.

The people who embraced peace must not surrender their democratic rights to demand accountability.

The Federal Government must listen before frustration deepens further.

OUR POSITION: OTUARO MUST STOP ANSWERING CRITICISM WITH ACCUSATIONS.

Tarakirivoice Newspaper Enterprise rejects the suggestion that every criticism of the current Amnesty administration is motivated by fraud, greed or a desire for bogus contracts.

That is an unfair generalisation unless supported by evidence.

We equally reject any attempt by individuals to exploit the programme, manipulate beneficiary records or divert public resources.

Our position is straightforward: investigate wrongdoing wherever it exists, regardless of the individual involved.

If a camp leader is involved in fraud, investigate and prosecute.

If a beneficiary submits a fraudulent claim, investigate and prosecute.

If a bank account was used to divert public money, investigate and prosecute.

If an official has misappropriated programme funds, investigate and prosecute.

If a contractor has collected public money without delivering the contracted services, investigate and prosecute.

ACCOUNTABILITY MUST NOT STOP AT THE DOORSTEP OF THE AMNESTY ADMINISTRATOR.

We therefore demand:

• An independent forensic audit of the Presidential Amnesty Programme’s expenditure under the current administration.
• Publication of the verified beneficiary register, subject to appropriate data-protection safeguards.
• A comprehensive reconciliation of outstanding stipend payments and student allowances.
• Transparent resolution of BVN-related disputes and affected beneficiary accounts.
• An independent review of camp slots and historical beneficiary records.
• Publication of verifiable scholarship, vocational training and employment outcomes.
• A National Assembly public hearing on the administration and financial management of the programme.
• Presidential intervention and a review of Dennis Otuaro’s continued suitability to occupy the office.

FINAL WORD: THE AMNESTY PROGRAMME MUST NOT BECOME A MONUMENT TO BROKEN PROMISES.

There is a painful irony in the current situation.

People who were once persuaded to surrender their weapons in exchange for a peaceful future are now publicly complaining about their treatment under the very institution established to support their transition.

This is not a situation Nigeria should celebrate.

The greatest achievement of the Presidential Amnesty Programme should not be the number of press releases announcing scholarships, training programmes or administrative reforms.

Its greatest achievement should be the number of former agitators who have become genuinely empowered, educated, economically independent and confident that the Federal Government will honour its legitimate commitments.

Peace must produce dividends.

Reintegration must produce opportunities.

Public spending must produce results.

And leadership must produce accountability.

Chief Dennis Brutu Otuaro must understand that defending his reputation is not the same as defending the interests of the Amnesty beneficiaries.

If his administration is performing as impressively as the November 4 press release claims, let an independent audit establish it.

If the allegations against his administration are unfounded, let the records prove it.

But if genuine beneficiaries are being neglected, if legitimate entitlements remain unpaid and if administrative failures have undermined confidence in the programme, the President must act.

PRESIDENT TINUBU, THE QUESTION IS NO LONGER WHETHER OTUARO CAN DEFEND HIMSELF WITH PRESS RELEASES. THE QUESTION IS WHETHER HE CAN STILL COMMAND THE CONFIDENCE OF THE PEOPLE THE AMNESTY PROGRAMME WAS CREATED TO SERVE.

The Niger Delta deserves better.
The former agitators deserve better.
The Nigerian taxpayer deserves better.
And the Presidential Amnesty Programme deserves leadership that understands that public office is a responsibility, not a personal privilege.

ENOUGH OF THE ACCUSATIONS. LET THE RECORDS SPEAK. PAY LEGITIMATE ENTITLEMENTS. AUDIT THE MONEY. HOLD EVERYONE ACCOUNTABLE. AND IF OTUARO CANNOT RESTORE CONFIDENCE IN THE PROGRAMME, PRESIDENT TINUBU MUST REPLACE HIM.

— Tarakirivoice Editorial Desk
Without Fear, Nor Favour.