WHAT TO DO ABOUT JUNE 12 and WHY OBASANJO CANNOT CELEBRATE IT.

By

Professor Omo Omoruyi

Research Fellow

African Studies Center

Boston University.

MANY DATES WITH DIFFERENT EMOTIONS IN NIGERIA.

What date or dates should Nigerians celebrate? This matter came up recently when President Obasanjo in his characteristic policy of unilateralism without consultation with the National Assembly and with the States declared May 29 Democracy Day. Democracy or Civilian Rule! There is a world of difference between the two notions.

One should recall how Admiral Augustus Aikhomu made the distinction clear recently that what we have in Nigeria since May 29 1999 is a civilian rule, which hopefully would lead to democracy. This is why I advanced reasons in a series of lectures in the US universities after the election in April 1999 to demonstrate that the emergence of President Obasanjo was meant to serve as a ‘bridge’ between the military rule and a democratic order. How that ‘bridge’ could lead to a sustainable democratic order depends on the capacity of President Obasanjo to resolve the lingering political problems afflicting the country, which surfaced after the annulment of the June 12, 1993 Presidential election. This is still an issue, which is critical to politics of 2003. You can find this relationship in my essay AFTER PRESIDENT OBASANJO, who / what?

This essay has nothing to do with who could declare a National Holiday. What I am concerned with is the relevance of such a Day in the nation’s history. Those who raised question about May 29, thought it was an attempt to adopt a benign neglect to the June 12 for obvious reasons. Of course they are right; this is not all.

There were others who thought that January 1 or October 1, the Amalgamation Day and Independence Day respectively could serve as National Day. With the facts available to Nigerians today the relevance of these dates depends on who is establishing the relevance.

January 1, 1914 was the date when the British Design was formally unveiled with the marriage of the south, in pieces to the north, as one entity. Others would tell us that October 1, 1060 is Nigerian’s Independence Day. But this would easily be dismissed and challenged by those who would remind the south that October 1, 1960 was the culmination of the marriage of the south to the north arranged on January 1, 1914 in a Sudan-type union by the ‘Sudanologist’, Sir James Robertson. One could easily be reminded that what we had on May 29, 1999 was a continuation of the internal colonial order of an indirect form this time.

What we had in May 1999 is simple. Instead of having a northerner ruling the south as we had before 1998, the north decided on May 29, 1999 to choose a southerner, who had no home support, but who would be dependent on the north for votes as the ruler of Nigeria.

On the other hand what happened on June 12, 1993 would have put an end to the traditional and historical divides on religion, geography, ethnicity and class in Nigeria. The June 12 would have had for the first time, a southerner, who would have come to office by the ‘will of the Nigerian people’ in a free, fair and credible election.

There are many dates in June and July in 1993 that had effects on the democratic transition in Nigeria. Some can evoke joy and others sadness. Which do we do? Do we celebrate the one for joy? What do we do with the one for sadness? Both exist in the history of the crisis and in the life of the winner of the June 12, 1993 Presidential election.

Another issue is what do we do since the President, Commander in Chief, Chief Obasanjo decides to adopt May 29 a National Holiday as a Democracy Day and shows no interest in the immortalization of the June 12 or of the winner of that election. My initial response is who cares for what President Obasanjo does? Those to whom the June 12 has meaning should celebrate it. Nigerians, left to themselves in the then 28 of the then 30 states in the north and in the south would have chosen the June 12 as Democracy Day and would have rejected May 29. The difference should be obvious today even to President Obasanjo that May 29 is for those who want to play games with the future of Nigeria.

The first issue to be resolved is that Nigerians should understand that the June 12 as the date of the Presidential election is significant, just as other dates in June and July. Which are these other dates and how critical are they to the crisis of democratization in Nigeria?

There are two June 12s.

The first June 12 was the date of Presidential election in 1993, which was won by Chief MKO Abiola.

The second June 12 was another date in 1994 when Chief MKO decided to make a bid for the actualization of his mandate.

This means that there are two joyous dates called the June 12, which would continue to bring national memories and should be immortalized.

There are two June 23s.

The first June 23 was the date in 1993 when the annulment of the June 12 1993 Presidential election was announced through an unsigned and undated statement in the early hours of that day.

The second June 23 was the date in 1994 when Chief Abiola’s claim to the actualization of the mandate of June 12 election was made a criminal offense. He was arrested early that morning and finally detained in what I called the Abacha’s Gulag where he died later.

This means that there were two June 23, which would continue to bring sad memories to Nigerians.

Let us go to July. July in 1993 and July in 1998 seem to be terrible month for the cause of democracy in Nigeria and for the life of the winner of the June 12, 1993 Presidential election.

Beside the July 4, 1993 when President Babangida and Chief Abiola met for the first time after the annulment, there were two important dates in July, which we should evaluate.

The first July was the July 7 of 1993. This was the date when the two principal leaders of the Social Democratic Party (SDP), Chief Tony Anenih and Alhaji Sule Lamido (current Ministers in Obasanjo administration) signed away the June 12. This was against the decision of the leadership forum of the party, which met two days before then. Most seriously this was done without the knowledge of the winner of that election, who heard of it in the early hours of the morning of July 8, 1993 like other Nigerians.

The second July was the July 8 of 1998 (barely a day after the July 7 of 1993). This was the date when the winner of the June 12 died. The difference could still be explained as the Joint Statement of the two political parties was signed in the night of July 7, 1993, but actually made known to Nigerians on July 8, 1993.

For the record, General Obasanjo a childhood friend of Chief MKO Abiola was surprised when Chief Abiola became the Presidential candidate of the Social Democratic Party in 1993. Out of this childhood consideration, he helped Chief Abiola in many ways including thinking with him on the obstacles he might face and how to deal with them. It was General Obasanjo who brokered a deal between the Ndi Igbo leaders and Chief Abiola under which Chief Abiola offered the position of Secretary to the Government to the Ndi Igbo, if he won the election and became the President of Nigeria.

It is also a matter of record that General Obasanjo was distressed when he heard of the annulment while in the US on a private visit and ran home to seek explanation from his military colleagues.

It is a matter of record that he gave up the support for the deannulment after the explanation and bought the idea that it was a military coup.

It is a matter of record that he settled for the idea of an interim arrangement as any civilian rule was better than a military government under General Babangida. He campaigned for the international recognition of Chief Ernest Shonekan as Head of the Interim National Government. Of course he lamented when General Abacha overthrew it. As far as he was concerned the issue of June 12 was dead by the time Shonekan was the Head of ING.

During the period of General Abacha he worked hard to get Chief Abiola released. It is also a matter of record that he bought the Abacha’s condition that Chief Abiola should give up his mandate as a condition for his release. He tried to make Chief Abiola buy this condition in a meeting in the Presidential Villa and Chief Abiola refused.

What we should appreciate about General Obasanjo and his view about the June 12 is that by the time he was sent to the Gulag, he had forgotten everything about the June 12 and Chief Abiola’s mandate.

It is a matter of record from the mouth of General Obasanjo that he became a convert once more to the idea of June 12 while he was in Abacha’s Gulag. That was why he made that known in his Sermon on Olumo Rock after his release from Abacha’s Gulag that the event of the June 12 should be resolved as a basis of setting a sound foundation for democracy in Nigeria. This was before the tempters visited him in the ‘vineyard’ and offered the ‘forbidden apple’ in Otta farm. What was this forbidden apple? It reads thus: ‘We will make you President; you will have to forget about the June 12 and what it stood for’. The rest is for President Obasanjo to tell Nigerians in his mouth why he changed his prophecy of belief in June 12 to a belief in benign neglect of June 12.

President Obasanjo is a victim of the sad events of July 7/8 of 1993 and 1998. The Nigerians who were involved in the two dates are those running the Obasanjo’s administration.

What is significant in the date, July 7/8 is that Nigerians should declare them as the date when all lovers of democracy would commit themselves to the defense of democracy. This will be in spite of what President Obasanjo said in Tokyo that Nigerians would resist any violent change of government in the future. The two dates should also remind Nigerians that never again shall a set of Nigerians sign away the mandate from the ‘will of the people’, as key officers of the SDP in concert with the leaders of the NRC did on July 7, 1993. The dates would have reminded us that never again would a winner of a free, fair election be detained until he dies.

President Obasanjo cannot guarantee defense of democracy in Nigeria as he gradually becoming part of the problem of democratization in Nigeria. As Bala Usman boasted in the recently newspaper interview, President Obasanjo cannot stop a coup in Nigeria. What Dr. Bala Usman was saying is that President Obasanjo does not have Nigerian people with him and would not be able to call them to action in defense of his government. It means that his government does not, like the June 12 derive from the ‘will of the Nigerian people’. See

Now let us appreciate the constraints facing President Obasanjo from the congruence of the actors in these two dates in July 1993 and in July 1998. Those who signed away the election are with him; those who masterminded the annulment are working with him as agents of his survival in office. How can he overcome these and come to terms with what he prophesied in the ‘Sermon on Olumo Rock’ is a problem for the President to handle. But he would have problems and we should not expect him to immortalize June 12 or the winner of that election now or in the foreseeable future. This would be so as long as he is a victim of those who annulled the June 12 in 1993 and who later sustained the annulment between 1993 and 1998. These forces are still continuing their role in the administration of President Obasanjo.

I was not surprised that on the prompting of President Obasanjo, President Clinton, during his visit to Nigeria refused to mention the name of Chief MKO Abiola in order not to offend his host. But President Nelson Mandela had to break with protocol and openly and publicly recognized Chief MKO Abiola by turning the prize given him by President Obasanjo to Chief MKO Abiola’s family.

Now coming back to the original question, June 12 is not just a date; it is also not just an event; it is an idea, which Nigerians should observe in a special way. It should be like the Martin Luther King Day in the US, which is set aside for education in racial tolerance in the US.

From now on the June 12 of every year should not just be a holiday because it was the date of a Presidential election in 1993.

June 12 every year should be a date when all Nigerians from Sokoto in the northwest to Maiduguri in the northeast and from Badagry in the southwest to Port Harcourt in the southeast and in between these towns should get together and ponder on the ‘issues’ in the annulment.

June 12 of every year should be a date when Egba sons and daughters in particular, and Yorubas in general, should ponder as to why MKO could not be the President of Nigeria.

June 12 should be a date to ponder over why Chief Abiola an Egba Chief did not have the qualifications of Chief Shonekan and General Obasanjo, who are also from Abeokuta and a Yoruba for that matter.

The educational institutions should be the venue for organizing what in the US during the civil rights movement in the 60s was called ‘sit in’. We need many ‘sit ins’ in education in democracy. This should also extend to the Nigerians in Diaspora.

I am actually calling on Nigerians to ask the critical question if there are unwritten qualifications for any Nigerian who wants to be the President of Nigeria as distinct from the written ones in the Constitution and in the electoral laws of Nigeria? In the various communities there are some notions of unwritten qualifications, which must be met in order to become the President of Nigeria. This is quite different from what voters consider during elections. I want to deal with two communities and their advocates.

Nigerians would recall that a distinguished Islamic cleric, the late Sheik Abubakar Gunmi once answered this question in the late 1980s and reported in all the Nigerian media and debated by Nigerian politicians then. He was frank when he named the unwritten qualifications. Those who cannot be are:

a woman;

a southerner; and

a Christian.

Of course we know what the unwritten qualifications should be for those who would be. They are:

A northerner preferably an Hausa-Fulani and a Muslim from the core north;

Non Hausa-Fulani, but Muslim northerner endorsed by the Caliphate;

Non- Muslim northerner endorsed by the Caliphate.

The Sheik could not imagine a situation, which would occur where a southerner, like MKO, whether a Muslim or a friend of the north would meet the unwritten qualification through the democratic process. Would the Sheik have anticipated a situation that would have led to the endorsement of General Obasanjo as the northern candidate for the President of Nigeria? He saw it in 1976 and endorsed it so long as an associate Head of State, a Fulani and a Lt. Col. was named.

Sheik Gunmi would have been forced to accommodate the redefinition of the rampart of the clique in 1998, which would also endorsed General Obasanjo. This was what the retired military officers from the north did in 1998 after the death of General Sani Abacha. These were retired military officers who did not see anything wrong with the violence ABacha unleashed on the southern elite. They had according to General TY Danjuma had to go for General Obasanjo in 1998 after the death of General Abacha just as they did in 1976 after the death of General Murtala Muhammed. The comparison between Abacha and Muhammed was unfortunate to southerners; but that was the way the retied military officers thought about the two cases.

Another point that should be noted was that in 1976 it was for a specified period. Was that why the clique insisted on a one term for General Obasanjo today? Would the issues in the annulment not occur after the one term of President Obasanjo? Are we not seeing it today?

These unwritten qualifications Dr. Nnamdi Azikiwe and Chief Obafemi Awolowo both of blessed memories could not meet in their lifetime; these unwritten qualifications worked against Dr. Alex Ekwueme and Chief Olu Falae in 1999. How do we overcome this? We should resolve that never again should such unwritten qualifications be used to deny any Nigerian his democratic rights.

DATE TO OBSERVE: JUNE 23: A DAY RIGHTS DENIED in 1993 and 1994

It should not be June 12. If the purpose if for Nigerians to ponder over what happened and think of how to prevent it in future, then it should be any of the following dates:

June 23 of every year the date the June 12 was annulled or June 23 the day when the winner of the June 12 was arrested unto death;

July 8 of every year the date the June 12 was signed away or the date the winner of the June 12 was killed.

I will recommend the (a) and not (b). Martin Luther King Day in the US is not his actual birthday. It is a day, which has meaning for the Civil Rights movement. The election day has little significance; but the dates when the rights of Nigerians were denied have more significance, hence I would recommend the June 23 of every year as DEMOCRACY DAY.

I shall continue this essay with an examination of the effect of the annulment on later developments in the country.