SIGNATURE BANK AND ABIA FUNDS: WHAT THE AVAILABLE FACTS SHOW
The controversy around Signature Bank and its alleged connection to Abia State Government funds has continued to attract public attention. At the centre of the debate is the claim that the bank is being used as a preferred destination for major government accounts.
However, the available clarification now in the public space presents a different picture.
According to the information provided, the major Abia State Government accounts are reportedly domiciled in other commercial banks, not Signature Bank.
The Federation Account Allocation Committee, FAAC, account is said to be with UBA.
The Joint Account Allocation Committee, JAAC, account is said to be with Union Bank.
The Internally Generated Revenue, IGR, account is said to be with Access Bank.
These details are important because they go to the heart of the allegation. If the major revenue accounts of the state are held in UBA, Union Bank and Access Bank, then the claim that Signature Bank is functioning as the main receptacle of Abia State funds requires stronger evidence.
So far, no public document has been produced to show that FAAC allocations have been transferred to Signature Bank. No official record has been presented to show that local government funds are being routed through the bank. No account mandate, circular, bank statement, audit query or regulatory report has been placed before the public to support the claim.
This does not mean that public questions should not be asked. In a democracy, citizens have the right to question how government funds are managed. Public officials must expect scrutiny. Financial institutions connected, directly or indirectly, to politically exposed persons may also attract legitimate public interest.
But such scrutiny must be anchored on verifiable records.
The issue, therefore, is not whether people are free to ask questions. They are. The issue is whether the allegation has been supported with evidence strong enough to sustain public concern.
On the available facts, the central claim remains unproven.
Signature Bank’s audited 2025 financial figures show significant growth. The bank reported ₦3.59 billion Profit After Tax, ₦24.99 billion gross earnings, ₦224.7 billion total assets and ₦170.8 billion customer deposits. These figures indicate an expanding financial institution, but growth in itself is not proof of wrongdoing.
The bank has also expanded its presence in Abia, including branches in Aba and Umuahia. Again, the opening of bank branches in a state is not, by itself, evidence of misconduct. For a state seeking investment, jobs and stronger commercial activity, the presence of financial institutions can be economically useful.
The concern raised by critics appears to rest largely on the past association between Governor Alex Otti and Signature Bank. That association is a legitimate matter of public interest, especially because Otti was one of the known figures connected to the bank before becoming governor. But available public information also indicates that he resigned from the bank’s board before assuming office as Governor of Abia State.
This distinction matters.
A past business connection may justify scrutiny, but it does not automatically establish conflict of interest, diversion of funds or abuse of office. To move from suspicion to proof, critics would need to present documents showing that public funds were improperly directed, warehoused or managed through Signature Bank.
At the moment, such evidence has not been made public.
The public debate should therefore be separated into two parts. The first is the legitimate right to ask questions about transparency and the handling of government accounts. The second is the need to avoid presenting suspicion as established fact.
For now, the available information suggests that Abia’s major public revenue accounts are reportedly held in UBA, Union Bank and Access Bank. Until contrary documents are produced, the allegation that Signature Bank is being used as a hidden destination for Abia State Government funds remains unsupported.
Those making the claim may still provide evidence. They may produce an account mandate, transfer instruction, audit query, regulatory finding, official correspondence or bank record. That would move the matter from political commentary to factual investigation.
But without such evidence, the controversy remains largely an allegation built around suspicion, association and political interpretation.
Signature Bank’s growth may be examined. The state government’s banking arrangements may be questioned. Public officials may be scrutinised. These are all valid in a democratic society.
But accountability must be based on records.
The facts presently available show that FAAC is reportedly in UBA, JAAC in Union Bank and IGR in Access Bank. That does not close the door to further questions, but it does weaken the specific claim that Signature Bank is the main destination for Abia State Government funds.
For now, the burden remains on those making the allegation to provide documentary proof.
SOURCES:
The Guardian Nigeria, 26 May 2026:
https://guardian.ng/business-services/business/signature-bank-reports-stronger-2025-performance-as-profit-rises-to-%E2%82%A63-59bn/
Vanguard, 24 January 2024:
https://www.vanguardngr.com/2024/01/im-not-a-board-member-of-signature-bank-otti/
Official Governor Alex Otti Platform, 24 January 2024:
https://www.alexotti.com/gov-otti-to-investors-abia-open-for-business-as-signature-bank-launches-two-branches-2/
