Nothing Must Happen to My Health’ — Adesanya-Davies Raises Alarm

Professor Funmilayo Adesanya-Davies has raised concerns over the reported withdrawal of her retirement medical benefit, alleging that the action followed a request by the primary pensioner and involved Shell Petroleum Development Company of Nigeria Limited (SPDC), Renaissance Africa Energy Company Limited (RAECL) and Shell Nigeria Closed Pension Fund Administrator (SNCPFA).

Adesanya-Davies, in a statement issued in Port Harcourt on Friday, September 4, 2026, said the matter was no longer simply a pension or administrative dispute, arguing that the withdrawal could directly affect her access to healthcare.

She said the medical benefit had provided her with access to consultations, medical investigations, prescribed medications, specialist services and hospital treatment when required.

“Nothing must happen to my health,” she said.
The professor described the medical benefit as an essential healthcare arrangement rather than a financial luxury, noting that she had depended on it for years.

She questioned the circumstances surrounding her reported removal from the medical scheme after more than 36 years, particularly following the retirement arrangements involving the primary pensioner and the successor company, RAECL.

According to her, any dispute between her and the primary pensioner should be resolved through lawful channels and should not result in the loss of healthcare coverage.

“If there is a dispute between the primary pensioner and me, let the dispute be determined according to law. But my health must not become the casualty of that dispute,” she said.

Adesanya-Davies called on RAECL to explain the basis for the withdrawal and clarify whether the company independently determined that she was no longer eligible for the benefit or acted on an instruction from the primary pensioner.

She also requested a review of relevant records, including her original registration under the retirement medical scheme, the terms governing medical benefits for retirees and eligible spouses, the circumstances of her de-registration and the authority under which the decision was implemented.

She further sought clarification on the identity of the person allegedly replacing her under the arrangement and the provisions governing the continuation or withdrawal of a spouse’s medical benefit after retirement.

The professor appealed to all parties involved, including the Rivers State Government, to consider the potential health implications of the withdrawal while the wider dispute is being resolved.

“Do not wait until there is a medical emergency before this matter is taken seriously,” she said.
Adesanya-Davies stressed that she was not asking for the underlying dispute to be determined outside the law, but wanted her access to necessary healthcare, including her current medications, protected pending a resolution.

She urged SPDC, RAECL, SNCPFA and other relevant stakeholders to urgently review the matter and ensure continuity of necessary medical care.

“Let the courts determine whatever legal questions must be determined. Let the appropriate pension and regulatory authorities investigate the matter. But nothing must happen to my health because my medical benefit has been withdrawn,” she said.

She added that she would continue to pursue her rights through lawful means while seeking immediate protection of her healthcare access.