The Nation Newspaper

Tag: illusion

  • Okotie: illusion, delusion and God

    The Yoruba of southwest Nigeria have a way not just with their rich language but with words. Many of their words actually represent long string of sentence(s). One example is ‘amunisiwi’. It means he who leads one into speaking unguardedly or he who causes one to speak such ill (of another) in a manner he would never have spoken ordinarily.

    Such is the situation Hardball is confronted with right now. After reading a recent interview by Pastor Chris Okotie, chief shepherd of the Household of God Church and presidential candidate of Fresh Democratic Party (FDP), one hung between debunking the clergyman’s claims and the fear of repudiating what may well be a divine injunction.

    First who is Pastor Chris Okotie? He burst forth into national limelight almost four decades ago when as an undergraduate law student, he released a hit song. The plucky kid subsequently left his studies, and for a few years practically became the king of pop music in Nigeria of the 80s. He would return to school, complete his studies and when the world thought he would dive full-bodied into the world of music and entertainment which he already ruled, lo he effectuated another drastic twist. He became ‘born again’ and then full time pastor.

    It must be a mark of his personal discipline and strong resolve that he never looked back to commercial music regardless that he was a huge success initially. He has been serving in the Lord’s vineyard since 1987 when he founded the Household of God Church International Ministries barely three years after he left university. And he seems to have made a success of it – by every measure.

    A few weeks ago, Okotie who is now 60 years old and who has dabbled into politics since 2003 when he started running for presidency of Nigeria now insists God has mandated all the parties to hand him the country to run, otherwise…

    Hear him: “I’m asking both parties (PDP and APC) and other political parties not to field their candidates for the 2019 presidential election and allow me to set up and Interim National Government with the mandate to restructure Nigeria and deal with fundamental issues that beset us as a nation in order to prevent a catastrophe…

    “It’s a divine mandate from God.”

    Some would say Chris Okotie is again at his megalomaniacal best. Some would laugh their heads off; some yet would say the man is eternally deluded. Many times he had claimed God sent him to contest for president and he had flopped woefully.

    But just supposing now is the time?

     

  • Theresa May: Grandeur and illusion of empire

    Living up to the reputation of her great and revered ancestors, Theresa May, the British Prime Minister, vowed to remain in Europe while thrusting a dagger at the very heart of the European Union.

    I hurriedly jotted down notes as the British Prime Minister robustly delivered her speech. All through the entire endeavour, she belittled the intelligence of her audience with convoluted logic only clear to her and her admirers.

    I could infer from her presentation that the British Prime Minister wanted the best of both worlds for Britain. She picked and chose only those policies that advanced Britain’s supreme self-interest. Above all, I discerned an ingrained discomfiture in living with people they – the British – cannot control or subjugate.

    It is the disdain with which she treated those of us in Africa, especially Nigeria that riled most. Hear her out:

    “We are a European country — and proud of our shared European heritage — but we are also a country that has    always looked beyond Europe to the wider world. That is why we are one of the most racially diverse countries in Europe, one of the most multicultural members of the European Union, and why — whether we are talking about India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, America, Australia, Canada, New Zealand, countries in Africa or those that are closer to home in Europe — so many of us have close friends and relatives from across the world.”

    India, Bangladesh and others were tangentially mentioned. The entire Africa, she ‘majestically’ grouped as one anonymous unit. Not one mention of Nigeria by name; even though she singled out tiny New Zealand.

    She referred to “the next biennial Commonwealth heads of Government meeting in 2018” in a manner to suggest she was sure her serfs in this ‘unique’ grouping would be summoned, and troop out to obey. Speaking for Britain, she left no doubt about her grand ambition to use us, as usual, as props in building her ‘Global Britain’: euphemism for the revival of her dream of Empire.

    I am not an economist nor a trade expert to digest the full implications of the copious references made in the British Prime Minister’s strategy and ‘Plan for Britain’. I sense we would be lucky, this time, to be used only as pawns or bargaining chips, in Theresa May’s dream of ‘a truly Global Britain’. More humiliation awaits us.

    I would, however, wish to ask where we fit into Theresa May’s grand design and scheme. Where do we as a country intend to stand? Do we still remain an appendage to an empire that had long expired, was resuscitated and transformed in a chameleonic form to Commonwealth? Where do we belong in an association where we had allowed our dignity to be thoroughly bruised, with specks and crumbs thrown at us from the master’s table?

    I visited Britain for the first time, as a student, in 1955. It was to represent the Students’ Union of the University College of Ibadan at the International Students’ Conference in Birmingham. This was a year before Theresa May was born (October 1, 1956). Then, I had a smooth passage and entry in and out of London.

    As a young diplomat at the Nigeria High Commission in London in 1959, I and my colleagues also went in and out of Heathrow airport with our heads held high. Whereas our counterparts, European visitors, would queue up at the immigration desks, waiting for their passports to be stamped, we were waved through with dignity. With the passage and efflux of time, the reverse has been the case.

    I mention these episodes because of the nexus between British immigration policy then, when it was massively in their own self-interest; and now, when others are marginally benefitting from it.

    Our lot with Britain seems to have deteriorated with time. This is not entirely their fault. We have not built dependable and lasting mechanisms into our system to regulate our entry and protect our reputation as a people in foreign lands. Nor has Britain treated us with the measure of respect and decorum befitting our membership in the Commonwealth. This is obvious and evident from Theresa May’s Brexit speech. As I now write, I doubt whether there has been any consultation with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs on Britain’s Brexit policy.

    Immigration, a focal theme in the British Prime Minister’s project, has now become a catch phrase. As usual, we have been used and dumped: from slavery to partition, from partition to colonization, from colonization to independence, and from independence to a malleable, manipulated neo-colonial entity. Should Theresa May’s dream come  true, we will certainly become an appendage to Global Britain – a return to Her Majesty’s new and reconstructed empire.

    It should now be clear to us that while the Commonwealth may have meant something in the past – and may have served some purpose however limited, there had never, in reality, been any wealth that was common.

    Everything considered, and upon thorough reflection, we have always carried a disproportionate share of its burden. The hypothesis of equality on which the association is supposedly constructed, will, I believe, sooner or later, be put to test. Must we always genuflect and bow to a distant imperial majesty?

    Theresa May speaks up so proudly and confidently for the supreme interest of her country. In doing so, she may have stirred up the hornets’ nest. I hope she and her admirers have not unduly taken us for granted as she outlined a plan that has deeply grated at the dignity of others, and the very essence of our being. What is or what should be our response? Pull out from this contraption at an appropriate time, among taking other well-considered policy measures?

    Theresa May has, as yet, many hurdles to scale; first within the United Kingdom itself. We must be fully prepared for the darts that will be hurled at us. This is especially so because amongst us are many influential and powerful voices – patriots all – who love Britain and the Commonwealth more than their own country.

    How prepared is Nigeria for a post-Brexit era?  In the same vein, we should ask, how prepared are we for a Trump presidency which shares an ideological affinity with the proponents of Brexit.

    Immigration has been a central component in the Brexit agenda. Make no mistake about this. The word IMMIGRATION can only mean one thing in the manner it is now being bandied around by heirs of unrepentant slave dealers whose ancestors were, themselves, undocumented, uninvited and unwelcome colonisers, who brutalised us spiritually and mentally, ripped us of our dignity, and imposed their will and dominance on us.

    If the ungarnished truth must be told, the word immigration, as currently peddled, connotes the worst form of prejudice, discrimination, racism and total rejection, notwithstanding any spurious rationalization.

    The direct consequence is starkly manifested in the fate of men, women and children who perish, today, in the high seas, just as they did during the abominable era of the slave trade.

    The frenzy is driven now, as it was then, by the same philosophy of greed and hate; spun from the same evil yarn of contempt for fellow human beings.

    How many more lives will be allowed to perish before their conscience is pricked – the conscience of these professed Christians, acclaimed leaders of their communities, who constantly mouth meaningless slogans such as their ‘values’, ‘ways of life’ and ‘shared heritage’?

    We wish Theresa May and her bed-fellows the best of luck in their search for grandeur and illusion of empire. It is now Global Britain; and no longer Great Britain, since maverick Donald Trump has appropriated to himself the word great, in his clumsy advocacy ‘to make the United States Great Again’.

     

    • Ambassador Olisemeka, CON, is former Foreign Minister of Nigeria

  • ‘Writer’s block is an illusion’

    In continuation of his nation-wide tour and public reading of his prose fiction, My Name is Okoro, basically focusing on the place of the minorities of the South-South during the Nigerian civil war of 1967 – 1970, Mr. Sam Omatseye, chairman of the editorial board of The Nation Newspapers, was at the Obafemi Awolowo University, (OAU), Ile Ife, Osun State last week, where he used the opportunity to tackle myriad of burning national issues raised by the book and other attendant exigencies of nationhood. Edozie Udeze was there

    The popularity and the high sense of craftsmanship and witticism embedded in Mr. Sam Omatseye’s My Name is Okoro has continued to spread and raise more topical issues and points of conversation on the problems of the nation-state.  And as an author, he has consistently emphasized the fact that the story of My Name is Okoro emanated because he wanted to establish the voices of the minorities of Southern Nigeria who were not only traumatized by the pogrom of the 1960s, but were equally adversely affected by the civil war itself (1967 – 1970).

    Last week at the Obafemi Awolowo University (OAU), Ile-Ife, Osun State, where the department of English facilitated the reading of his book, Omatseye read an emotionally-suffused portion where Okey, one of the minor characters displayed one of those rare but inevitable gallantry and courage that often trailed some of the scenes that took place before the advent of the war proper.  The story places Udeze, Fidelis, Okoro, Okey and his mother squarely in the scene that lead to more happenings which expose the role of some of the major characters in the novel.  Fidelis said:  “I was with Okey when they came that night.  We were playing Ludo game in their parlour.  Suddenly Udeze ran into the house and said they are coming in Igbo language.”

    Consequently, Okey brought out his gun and the game of the survival of the fittest began.  This is the portion of the book where the author craftily re-establishes contact between Okoro and the circumstances surrounding the escape of some of his in-laws from the obnoxious scene of the pogrom in the North.  This is necessary because Okoro’s wife, Nneka, is Udeze’s sister and Okey who volunteers to defend the family finally pays with his life, while Udeze escapes with their mother to the East.

    In another section, Omatseye drew attention to the drama between some returnee Biafrans and the soldiers at the head bridge, Asaba.  Deliberately done, it was to show the level of frenzy displayed by those who went home to prepare for a new Republic and how it took its toll on the people.  Thereafter, he teased the audience with the birth of Udeze and how he was nicknamed Omalicha to show how hairy and handsome he was at birth.

    For Omatsye, the occasion of the reading was like a child coming back home after many years of sojourning outside the shores of his land.  OAU being his Alma matter, Omatseye was not only filled with that unbridled spirit of nostalgia, the students and their teachers were very much eager to welcome him as Omoluabi (the child who returned).  And so the atmosphere became electrifying, exciting and rewarding as the students pelted him with questions on the issues of the war, the reasons for the novel, whether the undercurrents that necessitated the call for Biafra in 1966 and more still persist today.

    In his usual characteristic artistic style and brilliant sense of presentation, Omatseye, chairman of the editorial board of The Nation newspapers and a multiple award winning columnist, said, “Yes, what inspired My Name is Okoro…  Interestingly a number of things inspired it.  I said I read the book by General Alabi Isama.  That was the immediate tonic.  I have also read other books on the civil war.  But I discovered that the minority narrative and perspective was not prominent.  So that was why I decided to do it.  You people stated pertinently in your question that I didn’t mention the Ijaws and others.  Yes, I didn’t set out to write about the Ijaws, but to write about the minorities.  I wrote about the Urhobos and the Itsekiri’s and the Mid-West where I was conversant with.  So, I used them as metaphor, even though I have some characters which are minor from the other side.”

    Even though as an author, a well-grounded novelist, poet and playwright Omatseye’s primary intention was to ensure that the story fulfilled its mission.  He went on to say, “I wanted the conversation to be a bit more broad-based so that people wouldn’t say it is one-sided.  There are plenty of Igbo characters in the book who also belonged to Biafra.  Even Okoro himself spent more time in Biafra.  And that in itself was a way of also trying to elucidate the idea that the minority even suffered within Biafra.  He (Okoro) was true Igbo when he was in the North and when he came to Biafra in Igboland, he was not Igbo enough.  So, that is the character and the kind of dilemma I wanted to create in the novel.”

    He reiterated that his story is not just on the Urhobos and the Itsekiris, it is about the Nigerian crisis, that has refused to ebb or peter out.  “If you read the book” Omatseye explained, “you will notice that most of the characters are Igbos.  My most interesting character was a man named Chukwu who was killed by Udeze.  And the next interesting character for me was Nkechi, the girl who confronted the Hausa soldier, Abdullahi.  She ended up committing suicide.  However, I have another work that was set in the North.  Not all my works were set either in the South-South or in the South-East”, he said.

    As a writer who does not have literary fixation or limitation or boundary, Omatseye’s literary world-view is often very encompassing, wide and far-flung.  His spectrum of knowledge in his works goes beyond his immediate clime and clan.  He noted therefore that, “I wish I have that kind of ambiguity as well.  But there’s nothing wrong if I want to write only Urhobo stories.  For me, that is fine, but that’s not the case…  Then to the question of when will Nigeria ever going to learn from history…  I don’t know whether human beings are stupid but at least they tend to act stupid.  That’s what we are.  We have not learnt from history because we have never asked any question.  In my latest poetry collection here, Scented Offal, I attempted the narration of the Nigerian history up to the civil war (1967 – 1970).  The issue of Nigeria whether it is ethnic, whether it is the economy, whether it is inter-ethnic crisis, whether it is education or the issue of North or South or even the issue of the civil war, we have never resolved any issue.  And if you have never resolved any issue it will never go away.”

    The students were deeply worried too that the lopsidedness of the Nigerian setting is not helping for concerted progress.  Omatseye however, continued with his antidote on how to safeguard the society today for the progress of tomorrow.  “The cracks are still there and that is why we have not resolved any problem.  And that is why we keep rigmarolling and have not learnt from history.  And history will never come to an end.  The issue of ethnic crisis, ethnic suspicion, will never come to an end.  The civil war itself, the issues that started the civil war are even more prominent today than when the civil war erupted in 1967.  Whether in the past or now the reasons for Biafra were and are still justifiable.  Government should engage agitators in a dialogue, whether in the Niger Delta, South-East or somewhere else.  Dialogue is the answer.  So, we have not resolved the issue and therefore we cannot talk of solution.  The questions are already there.  Nigeria is about a question.  When I was in the US, somebody asked me the question on why Nigeria is underdeveloped; why since independence, we have not really developed?  Well I said that in 1960, Nigeria was a country of great potentials.  At that time it was 2004 – 2005 when I was attending a symposium.  Then I said Nigeria is still a country of great potentials.  So that is that”

    Omatseye nonetheless, counseled those who wanted to become writers or reporters but have the fear of the unknown lurking in their hearts to pick the necessary courage to be what they want to be in life.  He reasoned thus.  “I also had that problem being a journalist.  But once you have a dream, don’t let anybody stop you.  In fact, the problem with most of us as human beings is that we forget what we really want to do or become.  And we want other people to decide for us what we want to do; whether they are our parents, our wives, husbands or children, they want to tell us what to do whereas your body is aching to go for something else.  So, you better follow your dream; do what your body tells you to do because it will give you more psychological fulfillment and job satisfaction.  You are happy and healthier when you do what your mind tells you to do.  If you have to die like Dele Giwa, it is better to be happy and die like Dele Giwa than to live a thousand years, aching and dreaming.  When I was here at OAU, my heart used to be in Literature even though my major was History.  One of my classmates used to tease me thus:  ‘Sam Omatseye, the eminent literary scholar in the wrong department.’  Then when I left school, I discovered I was still being fascinated with literature”.

    Basically an interface between the students and the author, Omatseye could not also fail to ginger them on on how to persevere and begin on time to show which direction they are headed in life.  “Yes, I don’t really believe in a writer’s block.  I think Achebe said that once.  For me, I write every week and I have not failed to do so in more than ten years of The Nation.  I have written my column on Monday from different places in the world.  Just sit down and write.  If you are a writer, then write.  Inspiration is often an excuse.  Go and write; you have no reason not to, if you want to write.  If you have the discipline, you won’t give any excuse not to write or being worried about a writer’s block.  So there’s nothing like writer’s block; it is individual block”, he said grinning and causing endlessly ripples in the audience. With the Auditorium II of the Faculty of Arts, venue of the programme packed to capacity, the students were highly elated to see a product of their school who has attained an enviable height not just as a writer, but as a multiple award winning journalist, well-respected all over the world.  Present also were some top academics of the faculty.  They included the Dean of the Faculty of Arts, Professor Gbemisola Adeoti, the head of the Department of English, Professor Adeniyi Okunoye.  Others were Professor Wale Adegbite, Professor Chima Anyadike and Dr. Chijioke Uwasomba who handled the question and answer session of the programme.  Uwasomba described the session as an opportunity to see to the success of this show “which is not only good, but for us to engage Sam who has done a good job here.”

    For Anyadike who taught Omatseye, the author has matured over time and he is still young to produce more books for the good of mankind as time goes on.  He said, “Even though Sam read History, his mind was always in Literature.  He was a special student, fond of engaging both his teachers and fellow students in dialogue, discussions and conversations.  He was good at interrogating knowledge.  This was what he was best known for and today he has turned out to be a pride to humanity.”  He charged the students to always remember that it is what they put in today that they will reap tomorrow.

    For Adeoti who was a journalist before, this was the best time to shower encomium on Omatseye not only as an author but as someone who has dared where others feared to thread.  “He is a brave professional.  But as for you students you should endeavour to take from this knowledge as much as you can.” Short of describing Omatseye as an eagle on the Iroko he teased them that “by the time you are through with this, your life will never be the same again.  This is why he has come back home from Lagos to share from his fountain of knowledge with us all.”

    Adegbite who tried to circumvent some aspects of the show which the student anchors had already posited to be a symposium, explained that English is the language of communication and therefore has to be taken seriously not just by the students alone, by others who tease and taunt them that after all they merely teach English.  “What is in English?, they often taunt us,” Adegbite averred.  “But they forget that when we go into the ingredients of linguistics, we also encounter some professional jargons like they do.  Please keep encouraging one another to keep the language ever high and great,” he implored them.

    The students who were in very high spirits were made to perform different portions of their poetry renditions.  Their themes dwelt mainly on justice, fairness, love, reincarnation, freedom, change, redemption and more.  “Don’t look down on me,” one of the lines intoned.  “You know nothing of my pain.  You made us a caravan of slaves.  I need freedom from corruption as I hear that small voice, speaking, saying, redemption.  Redemption is what I need.  Redemption is the answer.”

    In response to all these Omatseye reminisces of his old days at OAU immediately came to the fore.  “I must say that as I stand here now I feel a little bit eerie.  The last time I was here in this hall, I was in the hall there like you students.  I never knew I’d one day stand at this side addressing people on the other side, more so students.  Therefore, I feel a bit weird about this.  Mrs. Bisi Anyadike sitting over there, we were students together.  And at the department of Literature in English, where I took my electives I was more involved in literary works than I was in History, my major.  It feels real, real good that I’d be here not to discuss a book of History but fiction.  And one of the things I will never forget about Professor Anyadike was his infinite capacity to seamlessly simplify a text in one sentence.”

    The outing was obviously the most hilarious gathering recorded by My Name is Okoro.  It shows how topical and punchy the theme and storyline symbolize for Nigeria, particularly now that Nigeria needs more conversation and dialogue to survive.

  • The illusion of Change

    The illusion of Change

    SIR: History will remain history, whether or not you spray it with marketing communication jargons. Like bonded slaves, our political elites are copying what their former masters have tried and failed. The historiography of behaviour change and social change dynamics, beginning from General Yakubu Gowon administration, the post – Nigeria civil war slogan of No victor No vanquished and its twin pillars of reconstruction, rehabilitation and resettlement could not address and assuage the fears of the Igbo’s within the nation. By the same token, the Buhari regime of 1984/85 and it is campaign slogan of Andrew no check out, Nigeria go better, glamourised by the Nigeria Television Authority(NTA), could not stop the mass tide of brain drain ever witnessed in Nigeria.

    Also the Obasanjo Heart of Africa project and the Good People, Great Nation of Yardua /Jonathan administration  failed on arrival because the fundamental  pathways to nation – building were not attend to and they were narrow vision sacrificed at the altar of political convenience and urgency of now to position government in the eyes of the people.

    The tragedy is that the victims are the hapless Nigerians, which they have defrauded repeatedly, but who cannot go back on their mandates at least for now, as well as the youth, who waged the wars as touts, and, are still being, used as political weapons to promote fraud in the traditional and social media.

    We really do have a challenge with our leaders (past and present), and particularly with this new slogan. They should order a small commission to find out what is happening to Nigerians and they way various institutions work. To what extent have politicians corrupted them? Why are Nigerians, so glued to trashy ethnic sentiments and mediocrity? What happened to truth and justice?

    When will our leaders study and rewrite a national rebirth document that address the fundamental issues of nation-building, truth, reconciliation and the politics of covetousness that dot the landscape. When will they?

    Change begins with me is meaningless urging that would not stand close examination. Common citizens toil endlessly in order to afford a single meal in a day, and for the cost of fuel and travel, most Nigerians have been hard hit. It is unreasonable in the extreme that change will begin with me, when some cabinet ministers who have rigged elections in the past are still in government. Why should change begin with me when we practice a unitary government in democracy? Why should change begin with me where those who appropriate the nation blind in the last 56 years are preaching divisiveness? Again, why should change begin with me where government officials who hold town halls meeting cannot engage with the people and please, why should change begin with me, when the National Assembly cannot pass the Petroleum Industry Bill (PIB) for years.

    Going forward, the leadership must be sober-minded and show sound governance doctrine with an uncommon integrity and incorruptibility. In order for true spirit of nation-building to happen, there has to be awareness of the past, acknowledgement of the harm that has been meted out, atonement for the causes, and action to change behaviour.

    These are trying moments, but let’s take responsibility for our actions and inaction and reflect on the collective heroism that inspires truth and reconciliation. Change does not begin with me!

     

    • Samuel Akpobome Orovwuje,

    Lagos.

  • June 12 and illusion of hope

    June 12 and illusion of hope

    The June 12, 1993 presidential election was free and fair. Twenty two years after, those who annulled the historic poll won by the defunct Social Democratic Party (SDP) candidate, the late Chief Moshood Abiola, have not shown remorse. In recent past, the Jonathan Administration acknowledged him as the President-elect. But, the effort by the Federal Government to immortalise the symbol by naming the University of Lagos, Akoka after him was rejected because some stakeholders said it was a wrong move. Will the Buhari Administration immortalise Abiola according to popular wishes? Group Political Editor EMMANUEL OLADESU revisits the June 12 saga and its lessons for the polity. 

    For the first time, Nigerians were united by the resolve to make the country a nation, contrary to its inherent contradiction as a plural social formation forcefully amalgamated in 1914 to serve the interest of the British. That moment of decision was June 12, 1993, when people trooped out to vote for the late Chief Moshood Kashimawo Olawale Abiola, the presidential candidate of the defunct Social Democratic Party (SDP).

    Abiola, the Basorun of Ibadan and Aare Ona Kankanfo of Yorubaland, was a Yoruba from Ogun State. But, he was endowed with an irrepressible national outlook. Thus, he was endorsed at the poll by millions of people across the over 250 ethnic groups. The mandate given to him was to liberate the country from the yoke of militocracy. Unlike the elections before and after it, June 12, 1993 elections was not shaped by tribalism, religious animosity and ethnic suspicion. It was a big achievement for the military that was trying to midwife democracy. But, it was mismanaged because the military President, Gen. Ibrahim Babangida, was reluctant to leave when the ovation was loud.

    However, the mandate became Abiola’s undoing. He was arrested and hounded into detention like a criminal. He never returned alive. The death of his wife, Kudirat, who sustained the struggle when he was in detention, was also gruesome. The Amazon was killed along Seven-Up Junction, Toll Gate, Oregun, Lagos when she was on her way to the American Embassy.

    Abiola never betrayed the import of his Oyo title: the Generalisimo. He was a man of valour; a great warrior and fighter. He was harassed,  abused and blackmailed. But, he refused to desert the battle field, That would have meant abandoning the people in their hour of great thirst for popular rule. To the progressives who rallied round him, it was a titanic battle for reshaping the country.

    In detention, there was no hope that he would ever return. The circumstances surrounding his death has been in the realm of conjecture. What killed him? Who killed him? The answer has been elusive. Abiola’s slogan was the abolition of poverty. He was the hero of the masses who suffer from want and misery. The military dangled carrots at him. But, the billionaire businessman refused to trade the people’s mandate for big contracts and mundane economic gains. His life was a lesson in determination, consistency and dedication to principles.

    Abiola outlived his tormentor, Gen. Sani Abacha. But, his last goal-the assumption of office, was not fulfilled. Thus, he lacked self-actualisation. He died a martyr. His death marked the end of  an era. His ghost is still hunting his alleged killers. His memory has endured. So were his grace, act of giving, meetle of speech, force of character, and love for the common man, which made him a reference point in history.

    Abiola was mourned by the beneficiaries of his philanthropic activities, the universities where he instituted endowment funds, the churches and mosques he assisted, the indigent students he sponsored, the workers in his various industries and companies, the poor and the needy he courted, his political associates and the masses that voted for him to liberate them from poverty.

    Besides, Abiola had another pastime. He led the fight for reparations in Africa. He said the descendants of the poorest of the poor; the hewers of wood and fetchers of water deserved compensation for slavery in Europe and America.

    Twenty one years the annulment, the pain of the annulment lingers. On the day the results were cancelled, there were confusion, outrage and condemnation of the barbaric act. But, the military was adamant. Democracy, according to lb servers, was subjugated by the barrel of gun. The hope of a peaceful transfer of power to the democratically elected President was dashed. The rest is history.

    Successive elections have been tainted with fraud. Pro-democracy groups believe that, if the historic poll had been affirmed, Nigeria would have laid a solid foundation for the sanctity of the ballot box. In 1999, the presidential election was resolved at the Supreme Court. In 2003, 2007 and 2007, it followed the same pattern. The major opposition candidate, Gen. Muhammadu Buhari, challenged the flawed processes in the court. Although the recent presidential election was perceived to be largely free and fair, it cannot be on the same pedestal like the June 12, 1993 election. The recent election was shaped by ethnicity and religion.

    On  June 12, 1993, when Abiola defeated the candidate of the National Republican Convention (NRC), Alhaji Othman Bashir, the poll was peaceful nationwide. There were no malpractices, thuggery and violence. To domestic and foreign observers, Nigeria was coming of age. Also, voters issued a red card to the soldiers of fortune. But, the sit tight military rulers resisted the change, caged the symbol and consequently, the victor became the villain.

    Babangida took the credit for the colossal assault on democracy. In the process, he dribbled himself into the dark corner of history, thereby missing a glorious opportunity to imprint his name in gold. Every year, he is remembered in connection the history of treachery and betrayal, which will be narrated from generation to generation. Posing as a populist leader, the former military leader elicited the support of the people for the longest transition process that was programmed to fail.

    When Babangida unfolded his transition programme, the late sage, Chief Obafemi Awolowo, cautioned against the illusion of hope. Weary of the prevailing political situation, he warned that when Nigerians imagined that the new order had arrived, they would be terribly disappointed. Awo also urged his followers to learn to eat and wine with the devil with a long spoon.

    Babangida started to gamble with the transition timetable very early. He shifted the poll twice. The third attempt was resisted by the human rights community. On poll day, voters were determined. According to the National Electoral Commission (NEC) chaired by Prof. Humphrey Nwosu, 14 million voters participated in the exercise. The contest showcased the potency of the Option A4, the open ballot system and the symbolic importance of the two party system. According to the poll results, Abiola scored 8,341, 309 votes, representing 58.36 percent of the total votes cast. Tofa, sources said, was ready to concede victory. In fact, the NRC National Publicity Secretary, Dr. Doyin Okupe, declared that the poll was free and fair, affirming that Abiola won a popular mandate. However, the game of deception by the military had reached the peak.

    Former military Vice President Admiral Augustus Aikhomu’s media aide Mr. Nduka Iraboh offered a feeble and spurious explanation for the annulment.  He said: “In view of the litigation pending in the various courts, the Federal Government is compelled  to take appropriate steps to rescue the judiciary. These steps are taken to protect our legal system and the judiciary from being ridiculed and politicised, both nationally and internationally.

    “In an attempt to end this ridiculous charade, which may culminate in judicial anarchy, the Federal Military Government has decided to: stop forthwith all court proceedings pending or to be instituted and appeals thereon in respect of any matter touching, relating or concerning the presidential election held on June 12, 1993, the Transition to Civil Rule Political Programme (Amendment No 3, Decree No 52 of 1992 and the presidential election.

    Irabor added: “Basic Constitutional and Transitional Provision Decree No 13 of 1993 is hereby repealed. all acts or omissions done or purportedly to have been done, or to be done by any person, authority etc, under the above named decrees are hereby declared invalid. The National Electoral Commission is hereby suspended. All acts or omission done or purported to have been done by itself, its officers or agents under the repealed Decree No 13, 1993, are hereby nullified.”

    Later, Babangida said the process of authentication and clearance of the presidential candidates was not thorough. Intoxicated by power, he declared that although he knew those who would not succeed him, he did not know those who would succeed him. Nigerians were taken aback when the military President boasted that “we are not only in government, we are in power.”

    With the cancellation of the results, Abiola’s vision for Nigeria died. The businessman-turned politician had fought many personal battles, but the  ‘June 12’ battle was the fiercest battle of his life. Rejecting the annulment, Abiola declared himself as the custodian of a sacred mandate. He said, having voted for him, the people of Nigerian expected him to assume the reins on August 27, 1993. “ I intend to keep that date with history,” he said.

    Babangida knew the ability of his friend, Abiola. He could not underrate his gut. Courage and the resolve to succeed were the hallmarks of Abiola’s life.  In a birthday message to him in 1992, Babangida acknowledge the rare virtue, stressing that “ a major feature of your life, so far, is the doggedness and determination with which you pursue any venture embarked upon”.

    Abiola fought gallantly as an inexperienced politician. His strength was his mass following. When the military turned the heat on him, hje jetted out to seek international support. By the time he returned home, his party had split. The SDP leaders started to speak from the two sides of the mouth. Also, empire was subjected to torture. Former Information Minister Comrade Uche Chukwumerije mounted propaganda against the just cause. He said, by travelling abroad, MKO had gone down in history as the first Aare Ona Kankanfo of Yoruba to have deserted the battle field. As June 12 divided the polity, associates were changing allegiance. The Association for Better Nigeria (ABN) led by Senator Arthur Nzeribe, engaged in infamous deformation of the struggle, collating imaginary signatures of people against the election. The late Admiral  Aikhomu also said that Abiola was not fit to rule, explaining that the rich are not necessarily philosophical kings.

    For Abiola, history merely repeated itself on June 12, 1993.  On June 12 1982, he could not even collect the presidential nomination form from the National Party of Nigeria (NPN) National Secretariat . The gate of the party secretariat was shot against him. The former Transport Minister, the late Dr. Umaru Dikko, told Abiola that “the Presidency is not for the highest bidder”. Two years before, he had also aspired to lead the NPN. But, he was defeated by the more experienced Chief Adisa Akinloye.

    However, in the aborted Third Republic, the stumbling block, President Babangida, was too formidable, assumed full executive powers, without the accompanying checks and balances. But,  Abiola was ready to lay down his life, which he eventually did.  In his famous Epe Declaration, the President-elect said: “Never before has there been such a cynical and contemptuous abrogation of solemn commitment and fixed programme.”

    However, the collective resistance by pro-democracy groups failed. When Babangida stepped aside, he did not hand over to Abiola, but an interim government headed by Chief Ernest Shonekan. Rationalising the option,  Obasanjo said it was regrettable, but understandable. The interim contraption was short-lived. On November 10, 1993, Justice Dolapo Akinsanya of the Lagos High Court dismantled the interim apparatus, saying that it was illegal, unconstitutional, null and void. On November 18, 1993, the interim government was shoved aside by Gen. Sani Abacha, who proclaimed himself as the Head of State.

    To the consternation of pro-democracy crusaders, Abacha abolished all democratic structures at the state and federal levels, disbanded the National Electoral Commission (NEC), banned the two political parties and set up the Provisional Ruling Council (PRC). Then, he promised to hand over to Abiola. In their naivety, credible politicians were cajoled to serve under the administration as ministers, thereby mocking their antecedents as June 12 travelers. The military Head of State later initiated a self-succession plan, which collapsed when he mysteriously passed on.

    Few days after Abacha died, Abiola also died in detention in controversial circumstance. His death in detention provoked outrage and condemnation. Human rights activists alleged that he was killed in detention. The autopsy is still in the realm of conjecture.

    As Nigerians celebrate the 22nd anniversary of the most credible election, there are some unresolved issues: Who killed Abiola? How did he died? Also, since the Federal Government has acknowledged him as the President-elect, who was unjustifiably denied the popular mandate conferred on him, how should he be immortalised?

    “Since the Federal Government has acknowledged him as the President-elect, who was unjustifiably denied the popular mandate conferred on him, how should he be immortalised”

     

  • Celebrating illusion of hope

    Celebrating illusion of hope

    As Nigeria celebrates 15 years of uninterrupted democratic rule, stakeholders are lamenting the gap between expectation and reality, reports Assistant Editor LEKE SALAUDEEN.

    On May 29, 1999, the expectation was high. But, 15 years after, the hopes appear to have been dashed.

    Security of lives and property cannot be guaranteed. Job opportunities are elusive. The standard of living is low. Corruption has assumed an alarming proportion. Cravings for wealth among public officials appears to be the norm. Government has also failed to create a conducive environment for business and foreign investment.

    It appears the government has been overwhelmed by the problems facing the country. Observers argue that the situation is even worse than it was before the advent of democracy.

    On the economic front, the story is depressing. The World Bank has ranked Nigeria as the fifth poorest country in the world. About 75 per cent of the populace live on $1 per day. The irony of it is that Nigeria is the sixth largest producer of crude oil in the world. The oil wealth has translated into mass poverty.

    It seems the country is broke. The states’ monthly allocations from the Federation Account have been dropping. There is panic  over the state of the economy. Finance Minister Dr Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala has attributed the shortfall in the national revenue to the oil theft in the Niger Delta, which has led to a grossly diminished accrual to the national treasury.

    A university lecturer, Dr Adetunji Ogunyemi, described the situation whereby oil thieves have held the nation to ransom as shameful. He said the government seemed to have given up and accepted that oil theft is a way of life.  He noted that the activities of these criminals have forced some states to go borrowing before they could pay civil servants.

    In his reckoning, an economist, Henry Boyo, said the economy was trapped in a paradox of deepening poverty, despite the increasing export revenue. He said: “It is inexplicable that Nigeria became listed among the poorest nations of the world. A careful analysis of the process of infusion of our export earnings into the economy will show that this anomaly was made inevitable by the Central Bank’s practice of capturing export dollar revenue and substituting naira at its unilaterally determined rate of exchange before the payment of consolidated naira allocations to the three tiers of government.”

    To Boyo,  the monetary framework is faulty, and there is urgent need for its fundamental restructuring so that the economy can be rapidly transformed  to induce vast expansion  in industrial activity with single digit lending rates. If this is done, it will also increase employment opportunities and lower single digit of inflation and the exchange rate mechanism. He observed that the government’s efforts to achieve these parameters, reduce poverty, enhance the social welfare in the last 15 years have failed woefully.

    Another economist, Dr Lanre Dada,  said the lack of planning and respect for the budgetary process are apparent. He said successive governments are culpable.  Dada said while the three regimes have applauded themselves for managing the economy very well, the economic indices tell a different story. He observed that Inflation has been skyrocketing, adding that the purchasing power has also fallen. He regretted that neither of these issues is being addressed by the government.

    Dada said it was disheartening that billions of dollars could not be accounted for by the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation (NNPC). “For a nation that relies on earnings from the oil export to have failed to account for this huge amount speaks volume about the level of mismanagement in the oil sector,” he added.

    The economist frowned at the Federal Government’s indifference to the oil theft in the Niger Delta on daily basis, noting that the activities of the criminals are affecting the economy, because the nation’s earnings from oil have dropped drastically. “What the states and local governments get from the Federation Account on monthly basis has dropped. They are short changed by the oil thieves,” he stressed.

    Dada said the so-called rebased Gross Domestic Product (GDP) that the Federal government is celebrating is meaningless to the common man because it has not impacted positively on his standard of living. He asked: “If Nigerian economy is ranked the largest in Africa, what does this translate to for the economic indicators such as the industry? Will it result in the resuscitation of moribund industries? Will it result in the return of those who left the country because of harsh operating environment?” The economist warned that the emergence of Nigeria as the largest economy in Africa may not necessarily trigger financial inflows, unless there are good policies and prospects to woo foreign investors.

    The fight against corruption by the government has not fared better. According to stakeholders, the anti-graft war is selective and is geared more towards dealing with perceived enemies of government. The high profile corruption cases include the Malabo oil deal, Halliburton contract scam, the fraud in the Ministry of Petroleum Resources, the Nigerian Communications Commission, particularly as it relates to an estimated N1 trillion debt owed the NITEL for telecom operators’ use of NITEL’s facilities at the inception of GSM, the fraudulent conversion of operators’ universal access license to a national carrier license.

    To public affairs analyst, Mallam Aminu Abdullahi, the anti corruption war is not just dead; its remains have been interred. He said the President’s body language encourages and protects corruption. “Remember the case of Stella Oduah, former Minister of Aviation, and the use of over N250 million to buy two bullet-proof cars, which were not provided for in the budget. Besides, the amount was in excess of the market price. Despite the public outcry against her continued stay in office, it took President Jonathan several months to sack Oduah,” he said.

    Abdullahi added: “Now, another minister has been alleged of misappropriation. Petroleum Resources Minister Mrs Deziani Alison-Madueke was alleged to have spent N10 billion on a private for her personal use. While the matter was still pending for investigation at the National Assembly, President Jonathan stoutly defended the minister by saying she is entitled to a private jet because of the nature of her work.  The minister said she would appear before the House of Representatives Committee, if the President approves.

    Upset by the President’s comment, Abdullahi said: “It appears our President doesn’t know that corruption is an impediment that stunts the growth of nations. No nation has ever developed or made any meaningful progress without tackling corruption head-long. I am not expecting any positive change or determined effort from Jonathan in the anti-graft war”.

    Dada aligned himself with Abdullahi’s position. He said government has refused to arrest and punish corrupt officials, thereby promoting the lack of accountability in public life. Noting that transparency and accountability are fundamental to good governance, the economist urged the President to eradicate the rot in the oil and gas sector.

    The 1999 Constitution states that the security and welfare of the people are the primary responsibility of government. It appears that government has failed in this respect.  The security challenges are enormous. The Boko Haram insurgency, the armed robbery and kidnappings have overwhelmed the government.

    A social critic, Charles Edebiri, is of the view that the Federal Government, which controls the Armed Forces, should guarantee an atmosphere of security, peace and tranquillity. He said a government that is popularly elected by the people, and still enjoys the currency of tenure, should handle security challenges because it is expected to have plan, vision and will power.

    Edebiri said: “Instead, our President only talks and complains about terrorism without pro-active measures to contain the insurgence, robberies, kidnappings and other crimes. Though the Federal Government has declared a state of emergence in Adamawa, Borno and Yobe and it has ordered a full scale military operation against the Boko Haram sect, the social critic raised some puzzles: Are we getting the desired results? Are the soldiers well equipped? Why has the Federal Government decided to seek the help of foreign countries to subdue the insurgents?  “These questions must be addressed, in view of the army mutiny in Maiduguri recently and the protest staged by the wives of military personnel over the welfare of their husbands,” he added.

    The National Bureau of Statistics (NBS) said over 50 per cent of Nigerian youths is jobless. The World Bank puts the figure at 56 per cent. Considering the country’s estimated population of about 160 million, the 80 million jobless Nigerians are endangered species. These are grim figures portend danger to economic growth and development. Experts have warned that 56 per cent unemployment rate is too high for comfort, alluding to the fact that the Arab Spring was triggered by a 25 per cent unemployment rate.

    A lecturer in the Department of Economics, The Bell University, Ota, Ogun State,  Oluwatosin Oyetayo, blamed the high rate of unemployment on government policies, infrastructural decay and the neglect of the manufacturing sector. She said that the economy is not viable, in terms of job creation. “Our production has reduced to almost zero level as a result of erratic power supply. The implication is job loss and Nigeria turning into a dumping ground of finished goods from foreign countries. The economic implication is that we are unable to manage our balance of payment. The social implication is that our youths are engaged in criminal activities”, Oyetayo added.

  • June 12 and illusion of hope

    June 12 and illusion of hope

    The June 12, 1993 presidential election was free and fair. But it was annulled by the former military President, Gen. Ibrahim Babangida (rtd). Group Political Editor EMMANUEL OLADESU revisits the dark moment in national history and the adversarial roles of the key players who aborted the envisaged journey to the new order.

     

    Twenty years after, the pains linger. The memory of horror has not fizzled out. The wasted hope, the betrayal by the backsliding actors, the use of brute force by the soldiers of fortune, the restoration of partial civil rule and the breach of popular rule by the military apologetics in power have prolonged the political bereavement.

    On June 23, 1993, when the historic presidential election won by the Social Democratic Party (SDP) candidate, Chief Moshood Abiola, was annulled by the military President, Gen. Ibrahim Babangida, the country was enveloped in gloom and anxiety. Instantly, the journey to democracy was crippled. The voters were enraged. A cloud of uncertainty hanged over the polity. Although the electorate issued a red card to the military, it was defiled by soldiers who resisted changed and subdued them with guns. The symbol of the struggle was caged as the victor became the villain. He never returned alive. The rest is history.

     

    The great betrayal

     

    Historians agree that the acts of treachery will be narrated from generation to generation. The criminal annulment jolted the people out of their delusion that its covetous and over-politicised military could voluntarily return power to legitimate authorities without a popular uprising.

    When Babangida shoved aside his predecessor, Major Gen. Muhammadu Buhari (rtd) in August 1985, Nigerians hailed the architect of the palace coup. He warmed himself to Nigerians by unfolding a transition agenda, which, as subsequent events showed, was programmed to fail, in spite of the heavy electoral expenditure and repeated assurance that the military was prepared to transfer power. To that extent, the General stood against national progress by elevating personal survival over and above the national interest.

    In justifying the annulment, which aborted the dream of his friend, Abiola, to succeed him, Babangida alluded to the conflict between loyalty to friendship and ‘love’ for the nation. “My commitment to the cherished values of friendship has been confronted with the demands of statecraft”, said the military leader, who explained that, when that confrontation emerged, he decided to abandon friendship for the need to for national service. “I love my friends, but I also love my country. It is the height of patriotism that whenever the love for one’s country is in conflict with any other love, the love for one’s country takes precedence”, he added.”

    Pro-democracy activist Comrade Joe Igbokwe, who has been consistent in opposing IBB’s presidential ambition in the post-June 12 period, declared that the retired General took the confused nation for a ride. “As we mark the June 12 anniversary, we cannot but remember the role of the enemies of democracy, whose activities also laid the foundation for this current dispensation, particularly at the centre. We regret that, 20 years after, we have not witnessed another free, fair, democratic and credible election like June 12. Babangida annulled the election and sadly, there is no way for him to rectify his mistake. History’s judgment will always be harsh on him”, he said.

     

    Dashed hope

     

    The late Chief Obafemi Awolowo, who had peeped into the future, cautioned against the illusion of hope, when IBB announced his transition to civil rule programme. He was weary of the prevailing political situation. The sage had been invited to participate in the debate organised by the Political Bureau chaired by Dr. Cookey. The old doubted the sincerity of the transition drivers. Awo predicted that the country was embarking on a fruitless search, warning that when Nigerians imagine that the new order has arrived, they would be terribly disappointed. When he returned to Ikenne from Lagos, following his visit to Doddan Barracks, he urged his followers to learn to eat and win e with the devil with a long spoon.

    To observers, the military was not ready to abdicate power. The military President’s game of gambling was confounding, but it was initially ignored by the vocal activists and other stakeholders. The evidence was that the critical poll was shifted on two occasions when the transition timetable was reviewed. When the military government knew that it was impossible to shift it for the third time, it rescheduled the poll for June, the raining session.

    But nature was kind to the determined voters on long queues across the country. The weather was benevolent. The minor hitches associated with the electoral commission’s operations, including the late arrival of polling materials and electoral officers in isolated places, were endured by the excited voters. There was no anxiety. People embraced the historic festival of change and choice without any fear of intimidation and molestation.

    The mood in the army and police barracks was not different. Soldiers, their wives and children, displayed enthusiasm as they chose between SDP’s Abiola and his rival, Othman Bashir Tofa of the National Republican Convention (NRC). According to the National Electoral Commission (NECO) chaired by Prof. Humphrey Nwosu. 14 million participated in the voting. Thuggery, violence and other electoral malpractices were absent. It was a miracle. The contest showcased the potency of the Option A4, open ballot system and two party democracy. According to the poll results, Abiola scored 8,341, 309 votes, representing 58.36 percent of the total votes cast. Tofa, it was said, was ready to concede victory. In fact, the NRC National Publicity Secretary, Dr. Doyin Okupe, declared that the poll was devoid of rigging, affirming that Abiola won a popular mandate.

    But the military thought otherwise. The announcement of the result was stopped abruptly, based on the order from above. The NEC Director of Publicity, Dr. Tony Iredia, who was displaying the results as they trickled in, was asked to remove them from the notice board. Later, a terse statement putting the announcement on hold was released by the Presidency.

     

    Game of deception

     

    At that point in time, the presidential spokes

    man, Duro Onabule, was about taking the

    back seat. The Chief Press Secretary to the military Vice President, Admiral Augustus Aikhomu, Mr. Nduka Iraboh, released government’s directive to the anxious reporters in Abuja, the seat of power. The statement reads: ‘In view of the litigation pending in the various courts, the Federal Government is compelled to take appropriate steps to rescue the judiciary. These steps are taken to protect our legal system and the judiciary from being ridiculed and politicised, both nationally and internationally.

    “In an attempt to end this ridiculous charade, which may culminate in judicial anarchy, the Federal Military Government has decided to: stop forthwith all court proceedings pending or to be instituted and appeals thereon in respect of any matter touching, relating or concerning the presidential election held on June 12, 1993, the Transition to Civil Rule Political Programme (Amendment No 3, Decree No 52 of 1992 and the presidential election.

    “Basic Constitutional and Transitional Provision Decree No 13 of 1993 is hereby repealed. all acts or omissions done or purportedly to have been done, or to be done by any person, authority etc, under the above named decrees are hereby declared invalid. The National Electoral Commission is hereby suspended. All acts or omission done or purported to have been done by itself, its officers or agents under the repealed Decree No 13, 1993, are hereby nullified”.

    The embattled military leader also justified the cancellation in a nation-wide broadcast on June 26, 1993. It was clearly an after-thought. Babangida rationalised that the electoral commission did not carry all the voters along, following the court ruling of June 10, which had cancelled the poll. He imagined a hollow in the process of authentication and clearance of the presidential candidates, although the candidates passed through the rigorous nomination processes at the ward, local government, state and national levels. Nigerians wondered why the Federal Government did not point out this before the poll.

    The allegation that bribes were offered and accepted by the INEC officials was also disputed. Babangida could not substantiate it. Neither could be convince Nigerians that a conflict of interest existed between the government and the presidential candidates. Indeed, the nature of the conflict was kept to his chest. Babangida had indicated his preferred destination when he submitted that he knew those who would not succeed him and that he did not know those who would succeed him. When he finally boxed himself into a cul de sac, viewers saw a staggering military President boasting that the military knew who its successors are chosen and that ‘we are not only in government, we are in power.”

     

    Morbid hate for MKO

     

    The SDP candidate was very passionate about the masses. He believed that power could be used to to transform the society. He had fought many personal battles, but ‘june 12’ was the fiercest battle of his life. When IBB annuled his victory, he became a political warrior with a a battalion. Rejecting the annulment, he declared himself as the custodian of a sacred mandate. He said, having voted for him, the people of Nigerian expected him to assume the reins on August 27, 1993. “ I intend to keep that date with history”, Abiola said.

    IBB could not make the mistake of underrating the billionaire businessman-turned politician, who had become the champion of the masses. He knew the strength and weakness of his bosom friend. In a birthday message to him in 1992, Babangida described MKO as a man of courage, stressing that “ a major feature of your life, so far, is the diggedness and determination with which you pursue any venture embarked upon”.

    Abiola had divided the military. Majority insisted that, since he won the poll, he should not be robbed. But the minority appeared more powerful. When the heat was much, he had jetted out to seek international support. By the time he returned home, his party had split. He met a divided and rancorous party whose leaders started speaking from the two sides of the mouth. Also, the military decided to subject his business to torture. His business investment was ebbing away. The military dictator clamped down on his newspapers, Concord, and other media organisations sympathetic to the cause of popular rule. They also effectively deployed the government media, which became more hostile to him and his supporters. Former Information Minister Comrade Uche Chukwumerije, now a minister, mounted the hottest propaganda against the just cause. He said, by travelling abroad, MKO had gone down in history as the first Aare Ona Kankanfo of Yoruba to have deserted the battle field. As June 12 divided the polity, associates were changing allegiance. The Association for Better Nigeria (ABN) led by Senator Arthur Nzeribe, engaged in infamous deformation of the struggle, collating imaginary signatures of people against the election.

    Vice President Aikhomu doubted the fitness of Abiola for the Presidency, describing the President-elect as one of the rich persons who are not necessarily philosophical kings. The military accused him of leaving the country illegally to mount an illegal campaign abroad against his fatherland. Gradually, MKO was losing grip of the situation. There were conflicts of advice and suggestions by eminent Nigerians. None could influence the military rulers to retrace their steps.

    To the observers, history was merely repeating itself. A decade earlier, Abiola had sought to rule the country. He was edged out of the race in the ruling National Party of Nigeria (NPN) in 1982. He apparently failed to see the handwriting on the wall. initially, he had made a bold attempt to contest with the more politically experienced Chief Adisa Akinloye for the party’s national chairmanship. The old political warhorse defeated him at the 1980 national convention. Indeed, on June 12, 1982, he struggled for the presidential ticket with President Shehu Shagari. He could not even obtain the nomination form as the gate of the party secretariat was shot against him. The former Transport Minister, Dr. Umaru Dikko, told Abiola that “the Presidency is not for the highest bidder”. It was said that, on the advice of his late wife, Simbiat, who had also lost a senatorial contest in Ogun State, MKO started losing interest in politics. What brought him back was the politics of ban imposed the cult of presidential aspirants in the two parties.

     

    The messiah as problem

     

    The main issue and obstacle to

    successful transition was the

    military President, who prided himself as the Maradona and Evil Genius. IBB had intended to be the greatest ruler Nigeria ever had. He had come with a disarming smile, courting the critical stakeholders, setting up a cabinet of talents, inviting the egg heads into his administration and venturing into socio-economic and political experimentation, which kept the polity busy. When coup plotters rose against him, he won sympathy because of the innovative social engineering. But to the surprise of experts, the economy continued to show signs of strains. As the military President, he assumed full executive powers, without the accompanying checks and balances. Deploying these sweeping powers, his administration started courting the Organisation of Islamic Unity (OIC). As the economy nosedived, his Structural Adjustment Programme (SAP) became a failure. Hundreds of people died and sustained wounds in the massive anti-SAP riots across the country. To sustain the regime, the culture of settlement became a feature of national life.

    From the onset, the transition programme suffered reverses. When the critical groups, including the Academic Staff Union of Universities (ASUU), National Association of Nigerian Students (NANS) and the Nigeria Labour Congress (NLC) raised eyebrow, the government came up with repressive tactics. Many politicians of note were banned and unbanned. IBB foisted two parties on the country, shifted the hand-over dates at will, changed the rules guiding the transition programme and instigated chorus singers to demand for the elongation of his military Presidency. He may not have corrected read the mood of the people, who actively enlisted on the side of democracy. he last straw that broke the carmel’s back was the cancellation of the credible June 12 poll.

     

    Failed resistance

     

    On June 23, when the election was cancelled, the face-off kicked off. On the battle front were Abiola, his wife, Kudirat, the SDP leaders who were loyal to him, human rights groups, labour, students, and the members of the National Democratic Coalition (NADECO). Abiola was ready to lay down his life, which he ultimately did. He decried the insult heaped on the voters by IBB, despite their cooperation with the military on the transition programme. In his famous Epe Declaration, the President-elect insisted on his mandate. “never before has there been such a cynical and contemptuous abrogation of solemn commitment and fixed programme”, he also said in response to the unsigned statement announcing the annulment. In Abiola’s view, not only did the voters shunned violence, rigging and other forms of malpractices, the domestic and foreign observers testified that the election was largely free and fair.

    The President explained that he, his rival, Tofa, and the two political parties never went to court to complain about the poll. He wondered why the Abuja High Court granted the unprecedented and curious injunction to the ABN leader, Nzeribe, who was not a candidate and who never voted during the election. He observed that these diabolical events were planned ahead to create confusion and discredit the successful poll. “from now on, the struggle in Nigeria is between the people and a small clique in the military determined to cling to power at all costs”, he stressed.

    When Abiola later declared himself President, IBB yelled like a power-drunk ruler. But the seat became hotter for him henceforth. There were sporadic protests in major cities. They insisted on his exit on August 27, 1993. He handed over to an unelected government.

     

    Interim contraption

     

    Three major forces were struggling for the soul of the country-the June 12 fighters, supporters of military tenure elongation and proponents of interim government. The motivation for tenure elongation was to save Babangida from shame or self-destruction. But rationalising the interim option, former military Head of State Gen. Olusegun Obasanjo said, although it was regrettable, it was understandable. Sources said that four six names were being considered for the ING chairman-Obasanjo, the late Dr. Pius Okigbo, the late Chief Anthony Enahoro, the late Dr. Mathew Mbu, Abiola himself and Chief Ernest Sonekan, the Chairman of the Transitional Council. Okigbo, sources said, declined, following the advice of the Igbo leaders. They felt that it would the Igbo of the Presidency in the future. Enahoro’s loyalty was doubted, since he participated in the anti-military protest. Sources also said that the mood did not support the emergence of any soldier as the head of the ING.

    When Babangida finally embraced his option, which offered him an escape route, he headed for the National Assembly headed by Senate president Iyorcha Ayu. There, he offered to step aside. “Following lengthy deliberations with my service chiefs, I offered as my own personal sacrifice to voluntarily step aside as the President and Commander-In-Chief of the Armed Forces of the Federal Republic of Nigeria”, he told the parliamentarians. But he also added: “I shall be ready, at the end of the interim government to pass on my experience in defense and security matters and any information relevant to the state to the elected President. During the period of interim administration, I will place before Nigerias full account of our stewardship. His speech threw legislators into confusion. Some felt that he had bowed out. Others said that he intended to bounce back. Many requested to know the meaning of ‘step aside’ from the dictionary. Ayu said his interpretation of the speech was that IBB has decided to quit. His deputy, Senator Albert Legogie, concurred , saying that Babangida should be left to take a rest.

    Enumerating the elements of the Interim National Government headed by Sonekan, Babangida said it would only affect the structure of the Military Government at the federal level. The unelected government will work with elected parliament at the federal and state levels and with the elected governors. But the Minister of Defense, the late Gen. Sani abacha was left behind. Babangida was silent on the tenure of the ING. He only alluded to a “reasonable period”. The Chairman, Sonekan, had no deputy. Therefore, Abacha, the most senior military officer and minister, became his automatic deputy. Sonekan was not even immediately acknowledged as the Commander-In-Chief. he was merely referred to as the Head of Interim Government.

    The great boardroom politician, Sonekan, could not reenact the success that attended his career in business on the slippery political field. The senior military officers left behind by IBB, especially Abacha and gen. Joshua Dongoyaro, were locked in feud. The country was in deep pain. Protesters doubled their efforts on the streets. The crisis overwhelmed his the illegitimate government. The politically naive interloper was learning a bitter lesson of his short political life. On November 10, 1993, Justice Dolapo Akinsanya of the Lagos High Court dismantled the interim apparatus, saying that it was illegal, unconstitutional, null and void. She said that, by virtue of Section 1 of decree 58 of 1993, IBB was not competent to promulgate Decree 61 of 1993, which set up the ING. But the June 12 fighters did not seize that moment. Many felt that, at that stage, Abiola should have declared himself President as the custodian of a popular mandate. On November 18, 1993, Abacha sacked Sonekan and stepped in as the military head of State.

     

    Failed battle

     

    The pro-democracy crusaders

    were back to square one. Abacha

    abolished all democratic structures at the state and federal levels, disbanded the National Electoral Commission (NEC), banned the two political parties and set up the Provisional Ruling Council (PRC). Then, he dispatched his deputy, the Chief of General Staff, gen. Oladipo Diya, to cajole and persuade credible progressives leaders across the six geo-political zones to join his administration as ministers. In their naivety, Abiola and his associates agreed that Alhaji Lateef Jakande, Chief Ebenezer Babatope, Mrs. Mobolaji Osomo, Alhaji Abubakar Rimi, Alhaji Baba Gana Kingibe, Chief Solomon Lar and Dr. Ayu to become members of the Federal Executive Council (FEC). Abacha promised to hand over to Abiola, but he failed to keep the promise. The credible progressive leaders were trapped in the administration. When the battle for the restoration of the mandate intensified, they could not resign from the federal cabinet. However, after stabilising he government for a while, they were sent packing by Abacha. It was another dark period. The national lean years were extended. The military Head of State later initiated a self-succession plan, which collapsed when he mysteriously passed on.

     

    Death of symbol

     

    Abiola had been detained, following his arrest after he declared himself President. He was held incommunicado. The late Chief Lamidi Adedibu had claimed that a bail was arranged for him, but Abiola’s personal physician, Dr. Ore Falomo, recalled that the President-elect was not aware of the conditions. Few days after Abacha died, Abiola also died in detention in controversial circumstance.