President Muhammadu Buhari was inaugurated for a second term in office on May 29, after winning the presidential election of February 2019. The day Mr. President was inaugurated is of particular significance in Nigeria’s history because on the same day in 1999, the Nigerian military had a change of heart, decided to withdraw from politics to face the task of defending the territorial integrity of the nation, which is the primary reason for its existence. The military had also decreed May 29 as Democracy Day. It did not matter then that many Nigerians justifiably felt that June 12 should have been the day to celebrate democracy.
June 12 was preferred as Democracy Day because on that day in 1993 Nigeria held an unprecedented peaceful election and overwhelmingly voted for a candidate, across ethnic lines. That election is adjudged as the most free and fair in our history to date. Curiously, the election was later annulled by the military in circumstances yet to be fully explained to the nation, but the date June 12 has become a milestone in our search for true democracy and inclusive politics because it somehow shows the true character of our people. The 1993 election shows the ethnic fault-lines so often bandied as the bane of our national development are not cast in stone, that we are indeed capable of marching to the same beat and heeding the voice of the better angels of our souls.
It was a pleasant surprise when the Buhari administration announced it was reversing the military fiat on May 29 and that Democracy Day has been moved to June 12 in recognition of the momentous elections of 1993. The Buhari initiative had me thinking of how far we have come with our democracy; it also elicited questions on whether that act alone had absolved the country from the ghost of the 1993 missteps, especially whether we had given due recognition to those who championed the cause of democracy in the immediate post-annulment period when the military exercised unaccountable power.
Read Also: June 12 annulment: Kingibe cannot rewrite history, says Fani-Kayode
In raising the questions, I do not seek to explore the depth of the current democracy or the growing gaps between its promises and our present realities. I am just inclined to reflect on how we have been able to remember the past as we nurture this democratic process made possible by the toil, and blood, of bygone heroes like Gani Fawehinmi, Alfred Rewane, Beko Ransome-Kuti, Anthony Enahoro and M.K.O Abiola. It was disappointing looking across the seats in Abuja on May 29 as Muhammadu Buhari was taking another oath of office. I wondered why the press was only concerned about the absence of most of the past Nigerian rulers at the event. But I was concerned about the absence of many living harbingers of the current democratic process like Alani Akinrinade, Balarabe Musa, Ebitu Ukiwe, Shehu Dangiwa Umar. It is also doubtful the sacrifices they made often cross our minds.
Abraham Lincoln described democracy as government of the people, by the people and for the people in his 1862 Gettysburg address. The war-time American president basically assumed that democracy is a system by which the general populace, of voting age, selects those who are to represent their interests in government and that those so selected are to work for the general benefit and interest of the people. It is contestable whether we are at the stage where government works for the people.
How can we forget our soldier-rulers who ruled by the gun yesterday, and were not shy to use the gun against the people just to remain in power? How can we forget the battles for democracy?
I am yet to celebrate my 24th birthday, so I did not witness much of military rule first-hand. Most people of my generation also do not have a recollection of military rule. Most people of my generation actually don’t care about the significance of the democratic system we have today, and much of the ignorance of my generation is due to the apathy of parents, and especially government, to history.
I shudder to think that while the other nations we copy teach history in their schools, our government made conscious efforts to ban history. No wonder many people of my generation know nothing about contemporary events, not even the history of military rule and the aftermath of the annulment of the June 12, 1993 elections.
My parents made me to read up about Nigerian history and watch documentaries on past events rather than relying on folklore and oral narrations, and I found many narrations on our past are driven by other things apart from genuine efforts to tell history. Before my self-excursions into history books, I remember a classmate back in my secondary school who often rendered accounts of the Nigerian Civil War that depicted the Yoruba as cowards and serial betrayers. I later found that the peddled stories on the war and the silly notion of a whole race as cowards were mere inventions unsubstantiated by facts. The poor boy might have picked his folklore from home. I suspect he may still be in the business of peddling folklore as history because my generation was not allowed to learn history in school.
Most people of my generation must have watched the inauguration in Abuja on May 29, without being able to connect with the past. But it could have been better placed in historical context if the living heroes of democracy, those who participated in driving back the military to the barracks, had featured in the event, and the press chronicled their contributions. We need to use such occasions to tell our story, and stop showcasing them only as aesthetically pleasing events.
Take this as a call from the younger generation to power. The youths who constitute majority of the population should be properly taught the history of our nation. My generation needs better understanding of the obstacles our nation had faced on its journey here; it is only then that we can credibly begin to think of a better Nigeria.
- Akinyosoye is a lawyer.
