FORMER Presidential spokesman, Femi Adesina, has said ex-President Muhammadu Buhari may have not survived his health challenges if he had relied solely on Nigerian hospitals for treatment.
Adesina made the statement on Tuesday during a special live coverage on Channels Television held in honour of the late president.
Responding to criticisms over Buhari’s repeated medical trips to the United Kingdom while in office, Adesina defended the decision, saying it was a matter of survival.
“Buhari always had his medicals in London, even when he was not in the office. So it was not about the time he was president alone. He had always had it there,” Adesina explained.
According to him, the UK doctors had been managing Buhari’s health before his election in 2015 and were well acquainted with his medical history, making it unwise to change medical teams mid-treatment.
He argued that the decision to continue treatment abroad was based on professional expertise and the limitations of Nigeria’s healthcare system at the time.
“One has to be alive first to get certain things corrected or changed in the country. If Buhari had said he would do his medicals here as a show of patriotism or something, he could have long been dead because there may not be the expertise needed in the country,” he said.
Adesina added that Buhari’s survival and ability to lead the country were directly linked to the quality of care he received abroad.
“He needed to be alive to be able to lead the country to a point where we would have that expertise. So those who complained about his frequent medical trips abroad don’t know that the man needed to be alive first before you can make a change,” he stated.
The former spokesman maintained that the late president’s choice of overseas treatment should be seen within the context of necessity rather than luxury or disregard for local healthcare.
This newspaper reports that Buhari’s frequent medical trips during his presidency sparked nationwide debate, with many Nigerians questioning why a sitting pres
Critics argued that his actions reflected a lack of confidence in the country’s medical system and sent a discouraging signal to citizens who could not afford overseas treatment.
The conversation around his medical care, according to experts, reflects the longstanding disparity between the healthcare available to the elite and the reality faced by ordinary Nigerians.
Public hospitals in many parts of the country are underfunded, understaffed, and lacking in essential equipment.
