Connect with us

Politics

Presidency To Lamido: You Falsely Accuse Tinubu In June 12 Roles

It is important to remind Nigerians that Alhaji Lamido, as secretary of the Social Democratic Party (SDP)—the party whose candidate, MKO Abiola, won the June 12 election—was among those who failed to oppose the military’s injustice.

Published

on

660 Views

Photographs exist today, showing Tinubu behind Abiola and Abacha.

The attention of the Presidency has been drawn to recent comments made by Alhaji Sule Lamido, former Governor of Jigawa State, on live television, in which he falsely accused President Bola Tinubu of supporting the annulment of the June 12, 1993, presidential election.

Alhaji Lamido’s claims represent a distortion of history and a regrettable attempt at revisionism.

He alleged that President Tinubu only rose to prominence after the formation of NADECO and claimed that Tinubu’s mother, Alhaja Abibatu Mogaji, mobilised market women to back the annulment.

These allegations are patently false. Let us set the record straight: Alhaja Mogaji never mobilised market women to support the unjust annulment.

Had she done so, she would have lost her position as market leader in Lagos. While she once had a personal relationship with then-President Babangida, this was before the annulment crisis.

It is important to remind Nigerians that Alhaji Lamido, as secretary of the Social Democratic Party (SDP)—the party whose candidate, MKO Abiola, won the June 12 election—was among those who failed to oppose the military’s injustice.

The SDP leadership, including Lamido and chairman Tony Anenih, wrote their names in the book of infamy by surrendering the people’s mandate without resistance.

To their eternal shame, Lamido and Anenih teamed up with the defeated National Republican Convention to deny Abiola his mandate.

In sharp contrast, Senator Bola Tinubu stood firm even before General Abacha dissolved the political parties and all democratic institutions, including the National Assembly, on November 17, 1993, following his coup.

Days after General Babangida addressed the Senate and announced his decision to step aside on August 27, 1993, the setting up of an interim government to replace him, Senators debated the speech.

On the Senate floor on August 19, 1993, Tinubu unequivocally condemned the annulment, describing it as another coup d’état and urging Nigerians to reject injustice and lawlessness.

The records captured his contribution, showing that he supported upholding the June 12 election, not against it, as Lamido claimed.

“We have a situation that suggests that the abortion of the June 12 election is another coup d’etat,” Senator Tinubu said.

“My question is, when are we going to stop tolerating injustices, coup d’etat and abuse by the people on whom we invested so much resources—the public funds of this country?… Yes, it is true that we have a crisis, but for every action, there must be a reaction.

This is a self-inflicted crisis because, without the abortion or annulment of the June 12 election, there would be no crisis like this. We have a government that made the law and abused its law.

Therefore, the present military administration, by virtue of abrogation and violation of its own decree, has committed a crime,” the Senator from Lagos West told his colleagues.

The election winner, Abiola, was out of the country when the legislators debated Babangida’s offer to step aside for an interim government. He returned in September 1993.

And who followed him to the Abacha military group, then openly planning a coup against the Ernest Shonekan-led ING? It was Tinubu.

Photographs exist today, showing Tinubu behind Abiola and Abacha.

Abacha took over on November 17, 1993, and dissolved all democratic institutions, including governors, the National Assembly, and the state legislature.

Tinubu and a group of senators reconvened in Lagos, defying the junta. Tinubu, Ameh Ebute, Abu Ibrahim, and others were arrested and kept at Alagbon.

The police took them to court and fabricated a case against them.

While in police detention, Tinubu continued to fund pro-June 12 protests in Lagos, including the blockade of the Third Mainland Bridge.

Weeks after Abacha supplanted the ING, it quickly became clear to Abiola and Tinubu that Abacha would not be a soldier of democracy as he reneged on allowing Abiola to reclaim his mandate.

Enter the National Democratic Coalition (NADECO).

It was born on May 15, 1994. Comprising a broad coalition of Nigerian democrats, it called on the military government of Sani Abacha to step down in favour of the winner of the June 12, 1993, election, MKO Abiola. On the first anniversary of his election, Abiola made a declaration at Epetedo in Lagos, announcing himself as the duly elected president.

Ten days after, on June 22, he was arrested, following which many pro-democracy activists also escaped from Nigeria, including Bola Tinubu.

Tinubu lived in exile for nearly five years while Lamido and his ilk made deals with Abacha.

While Tinubu was away, agents of the junta bombed his home in Balarabe Musa Crescent, Victoria Island. Thankfully, Lamido admitted that Tinubu played a significant role in NADECO. Indeed, Tinubu did more.

He also backed Professor Wole Soyinka’s NALICON, offering material resources to fuel the struggle.

It is well-known that Tinubu played a leading role in the agitation against the June 12 annulment.

Many NADECO leaders and journalists in exile and at home openly admitted that Tinubu sustained them and provided them with funds for the struggle.

With his narrative, Lamido appeared confused about the role of NADECO.

It was an offshoot of the June 12 crisis. NADECO provided a platform to channel the struggle.

Hitherto, all the resistance was left to civil rights groups, journalists, and a section of labour, such as NUPENG.

It is thus disappointing that Alhaji Lamido, despite acknowledging Tinubu’s NADECO role, would attempt to rewrite history for political reasons and being a member of the Coalition of the Disgruntled.

We advise Lamido to check his facts before going on television to spread falsehoods.

It does not help his image, and the coalition he belongs to engages in revisionism.

Revisionism does not serve the cause of truth or our nation’s interests. We do not want to believe that Alhaji Lamido suffers from what psychologists call tall poppy syndrome.

However, the conclusion is inevitable as it appears that Lamido is envious of Tinubu’s democratic credentials.

The facts remain clear: President Tinubu was—and remains—a steadfast advocate for democracy, in contrast to the record of Lamido and others who capitulated in the face of military oppression and intimidation.

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Politics

Obasanjo faults court determining election winner , at GJF Democracy Dialogue

Obasanjo questioned whether it was democratic for millions of citizens to cast their votes only for a few judges to determine the final outcome.

Published

on

By

8 Views

Former President Olusegun Obasanjo has expressed concern over the growing role of the judiciary in determining election outcomes in Nigeria.

Obasanjo stated this during the 2026 Goodluck Jonathan Foundation (GJF) Democracy Dialogue at the Ahmadu Bello International Conference Centre, Bauchi.

Obasanjo chaired the event yesterday emphasising that court undermines the essence of democracy when the votes of millions are ultimately decided by a handful of judges.

The dialogue, with the theme, “Beyond Elections: Can Political Parties and Judiciary Save African Democracy?”, brought together political leaders, statesmen, scholars and democracy advocates from Nigeria and other African countries.

Obasanjo questioned whether it was democratic for millions of citizens to cast their votes only for a few judges to determine the final outcome.

“If millions of people have voted and five people would form a decision either in favour or against the decision of millions of people, is that democracy?” he queried.

He also questioned the independence of the judiciary, asking whether it remained truly independent or was being influenced by the government

Continue Reading

Politics

2027: Ezekwesili Backs Peter Obi for President [Here’s Why]

Nigerians should not regard the country’s deterioration as an unavoidable fate.

Published

on

By

14 Views

Dr Oby Ezekwesili / File photo

Former Minister of Education, Dr Oby Ezekwesili, has urged Nigerians to reject the growing acceptance of the country’s decline as inevitable, describing the situation as the product of a failed national design that citizens must challenge.

Ezekwesili, during an appearance on Arise News, reaffirmed her support for former Anambra State Governor Peter Obi ahead of the 2027 presidential election.

In her words , Nigerians should “vote for themselves” by demanding leadership founded on character, competence and capacity rather than primordial considerations.

Ezekwesili- the founder and chairperson of the School of Politics, Policy and Governance (SPPG) and the CEO of Human Capital Africa, argued that one of Nigeria’s greatest problems was the resignation of citizens to deteriorating conditions and the accompanying erosion of the dignity and value of human life.

“What we have to show for it is the complete collapse of the dignity of the human being and the dignity of life.

It’s like we have zeroed out on the value of life, and yet we continue to think that somehow, if we just keep doing elections, we’ll be fine,” she said.

“I am challenging that and saying that Nigerians should at least vote for themselves. If no one votes for you in terms of the leaders you’re choosing, vote for yourselves.

” Nigerians should not regard the country’s deterioration as an unavoidable fate.

“The greatest tragedy of the country is this resignation—that this is our destiny.

I say no, this is by design.“It is not our destiny, this is by design. This design needs to be challenged,” she said.

Ezekwesili also called for a renewed national conversation aimed at establishing a common identity, shared values and a social contract capable of strengthening cohesion among Nigerians.

She described the Nigerian construct as having been effectively “orphaned”, arguing that the absence of social cohesion and social capital was worsening the country’s problems.

“The design that we run right now has not worked for us, we do need to design again,” she said…

Reaffirming her support for Obi, Ezekwesili said that her assessment remained based on the three criteria of character, competence and capacity rather than ethnic, religious or other primordial considerations.

“In 2023, I made it very clear that, using the criteria on which I see leadership either fail or succeed to govern well… the other two candidates score considerably lower than what you would assign to former Governor Obi, and so I was going to stand with Governor Obi.

“I don’t think that anything has really significantly changed,” she said.

Ezekwesili, however, cautioned against reducing the broader conversation about Nigeria’s future to Obi or any single presidential candidate.

“Don’t make this about Peter Obi. I don’t want us to personalise. I’m interested in the construct,” she said.

She argued that Nigerians should assess those seeking public office at all levels on ethical character, competence and capacity, saying these attributes increase the likelihood that decisions in government would advance the common good rather than private interests.

Ezekwesili consequently called for more credible Nigerians possessing those attributes to contest local government, state and federal elections, both for legislative and executive positions.

Speaking about her previous experience in government, the former minister also addressed her differences with former Vice President Atiku Abubakar, saying her concerns were not personal but related to what she described as resistance to reforms she considered critical to Nigeria’s development.

She recalled Nigeria’s debt burden and the effort to create fiscal space for greater investment in health, education and other growth-enhancing sectors.

According to her, concerns from international partners over Nigeria’s management of public resources contributed to her determination to pursue reforms in public procurement and demonstrate that the country could achieve greater value for money.

Ezekwesili said the experience reinforced her belief that Nigeria’s problems require institutional reforms rather than simply changing personalities at election time.

While maintaining her preference for Obi based on her stated leadership criteria, she said the deeper issue for Nigerians should be building institutions and a political system capable of consistently producing leadership that serves the public interest.▼

Continue Reading

Politics

Breaking: Tinubu orders EFCC to unfreeze Osun Govt account

Tinubu said that although he was yet to be fully briefed on the facts that informed the EFCC’s decision to approach the court for the freezing order, he believed the timing of the action was inappropriate.

Published

on

By

65 Views

President Bola Ahmed Tinubu has directed the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) to immediately approach the court to vacate the order freezing the accounts of the Osun State Government.

The President’s directive followed the controversy generated by the EFCC’s move to freeze the state government’s accounts, coming days before the Osun State governorship election.

In a statement issued on Thursday by his Special Adviser on Information and Strategy, Bayo Onanuga, President Tinubu said he was concerned about the timing of the action, noting that steps taken by federal institutions are often attributed to him as President, even when he may not have prior knowledge of such actions.

Tinubu said that although he was yet to be fully briefed on the facts that informed the EFCC’s decision to approach the court for the freezing order, he believed the timing of the action was inappropriate.

” Osun State is only a few days away from its gubernatorial election. Therefore, nothing ought to be done to give an impression that the EFCC or indeed any other agency of the Federal Government is being used to interfere with the election,” he said.

The President said that he was compelled to intervene in the matter in the overriding public interest to preserve confidence in the integrity, credibility and fairness of the democratic process.

Continue Reading

Trending