Abiola - capitaltimesnews.com

PRESIDENCY TELLS ABIOLA FAMILY TO FILE CLAIM FOR ₦45 BILLION DEBT

CapitalTimesNews / 2 months

3 min read

The Presidency has urged the family of late Moshood Abiola to formally file a claim if they seek details regarding the reported ₦45 billion debt allegedly owed to them by the federal government. This development follows recent remarks by former Jigawa State Governor, Sule Lamido, who appealed to President Bola Tinubu to compensate the Abiola family as a step toward national reconciliation and justice. Lamido reignited the long-standing controversy over the alleged debt, urging the federal government to pay the heirs of the late business magnate approximately ₦45 billion. He claimed that Abiola’s company, International Telephone & Telegraph, executed significant telecommunications contracts for the military government in the 1970s but was never fully compensated. According to Lamido, a former head of state, Murtala Muhammed, acknowledged the debt before his 1976 assassination, and Abiola privately confirmed the figure when Lamido visited him shortly before his arrest in 1994. A senior presidential official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said the Abiola family could submit a formal claim if they possess sufficient evidence. “The children of MKO Abiola are still very much alive. The first son is alive. So, if there is any money the government is owing Abiola, let them file a claim. It is not for Sule Lamido to be saying this,” the official stated. “Obasanjo was president for eight years. Why didn’t he pay it? President Buhari was there for eight years, why didn’t he pay? So, I don’t think it is Sule Lamido’s business at all.” The Aare Ona Kakanfo of Yorubaland, Gani Adams, has also weighed in on the matter, urging President Tinubu to act on the demand. “That money should be paid to Abiola’s family. It is not just about compensation, it is about honouring a man who gave everything for this democracy. Giving an appointment to one of his children is not enough,” Adams said. Meanwhile, a family member, Hafsat Abiola, expressed appreciation to the federal government for posthumously conferring the CFR national honour on her late mother, Kudirat Abiola. “There are no words to adequately express the depth of gratitude I feel at President Tinubu’s posthumous conferment of the merit of CFR on my mum, Kudirat Abiola. She was guided both by love and a sense of duty to defend her husband’s mandate, and to work with many across the country for the restoration of democracy. Yet, I have no doubt that she would have been overwhelmed with joy to be so honoured.

JUNE 12 AND THE PARADOX OF NIGERIAN DEMOCRACY: BETWEEN FOUNDATIONAL IDEALS AND POLITICAL SYMBOLISM

CapitalTimesNews / 2 months

3 min read

By Augustine Eigbe, Ph.D June 12, 1993, remains a defining moment in the annals of Nigeria’s political history. The annulment of what is widely regarded as the freest and fairest election in the country’s history won by Chief Moshood Kashimawo Olawale Abiola (M.K.O Abiola) GCFR, marked both the apogee of democratic aspirations and the abyss of military dictatorship in Nigeria. Decades after the return to civilian rule in 1999, the official observance of June 12 as Nigeria’s Democracy Day by Ex-President Muhammadu Buhari’s administration in 2018 was seemingly an act of historical redress. Nevertheless, this symbolic gesture stands in sharp contradistinction to the systemic deterioration of democratic values characterising the country’s modern-day governance paradigm. It is imperative to interrogate the disjunction between June 12’s foundational ideals of democratic integrity and today’s elite-dominated elections since 1999. The June 12 election was remarkable not only for its unprecedented fairness but also for its cross-ethnic mandate, as Abiola secured broad-based support across Nigeria’s contentious ethnic and religious divides. The annulment of the 1993 election by General Ibrahim Badamasi Babangida’s (IBB) regime epitomised the junta’s disdain for democracy, sparking protests that culminated in the 1999 transition to civilian rule under General Abdulsalam Abubakar. However, the transition to democracy, rather than fulfilling the emancipatory, inclusive, and participatory promises of June 12, created a civilian oligarchy that replicated the exclusionary tendencies of its military predecessors. The official recognition of June 12 as Democracy Day was an overdue acknowledgement of its historical significance, yet it functions more as a political theatre than substantive restitution. The same Buhari administration that conferred this honour presided over some of the most controversial elections, tainted by technical glitches, voter suppression, manipulation, militarisation of the electoral process, and judicial meddling. This irony exposes a broader trend of the co-optation of democratic symbols by a political class that remains radically disconnected from the egalitarian ethos of the June 12 struggle. Moreover, while June 12 Democracy Day is rhetorically invoked as a symbol of national unity, the nation’s contemporary politics remains embedded in identity politics, deeply polarised along ethnic and religious lines. The weakening of institutions and the shrinking of civic space exemplified by the misapplication of the Cybercrime Act to suppress freedom of expression and target citizens criticising the excesses of the government further spotlights the gap between the democratic ideals enshrined in the June 12 struggle and the clientelist, neo-patrimonial system that defines today’s governance in the country. For June 12 to transcend mere symbolism,the political elites must move beyond ceremonial gestures and fix the structural deficits that compromise democratic progress. The reconciliation of Nigeria’s political development with the aspirations of the June 12 struggle requires the institutionalisation of transparency, accountability, citizen-centered governance, electoral restructuring, an independent judiciary, and strict adherence to the rule of law. Otherwise, the annual rituals of Democracy Day commemoration will remain an empty spectacle, a disquieting reflection of the unresolved contradictions between Nigeria’s democratic aspirations and its present-day political realities. The sincere memorialisation of June 12 lies not in yearly rhetorical flourishes but in the unswerving commitment to the democratic principles for which Chief MKO Abiola and countless other pro-democracy figures sacrificed their lives and resources. Until then, the discordance between Nigeria’s democratic pretensions and its dictatorial tendencies will persist as a sobering legacy of unfulfilled promises of June 12 democratic aspirations. Augustine Eigbe, Ph. D. is a Historian and Development Communication Expert.

ABIOLA FAMILY SPEAKS OUT ON 1993 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION ANNULMENT

CapitalTimesNews / 5 months

1 min read

Alhaji Lateef Kola Abiola, scion of the Bashorun MKO Abiola dynasty, has released a statement addressing the recent confirmation by former Military President General Ibrahim Babangida that Bashorun MKO Abiola won the 1993 presidential election. “It took the former Military President, General Ibrahim Babangida, an incredibly long 32 years to confirm what the whole world knew all along, that Bashorun MKO Abiola won the 1993 presidential election,” Abiola said. Abiola noted that the June 12 election goes beyond his family, affecting many other families who lost loved ones and suffered economic hardship due to the annulment. “As such, it is necessary that as a family, we take more than just a cursory look into the confirmation of known facts, but also the public’s response.” Abiola stated that he and many family members have decided to take more time before giving a substantive response. “Personally, having been an active participant in the campaign, the election and the subsequent struggle to protect the mandate, I wonder whether the question Nigerians should ask themselves is whether the country has learned any lessons from the tragic June 12 annulment. Frankly, I am not sure.”

IBB: A JOURNEY IN DISSERVICE

CapitalTimesNews / 5 months
0
4 min read

By Lemmy Ughegbe General Ibrahim Badamasi Babangida (IBB) has long been nicknamed Nigeria’s “Maradona” for his adept political manoeuvring, often sidestepping accountability for impactful decisions. Babangida, however, surpassed himself in Chapter 12 of A Journey in Service, not by confessing to the annulment of the June 12, 1993, election, but by rewriting history without shame. Instead of owning up to his actions in undermining Nigerians and saying sorry, he blamed General Sani Abacha, Chief MKO Abiola, and Professor Humphrey Nwosu—all deceased—for the election’s nullification.It is an extraordinary act of self-preservation cloaked in deception. Babangida alleges Abacha circumvented him during the annulment, exceeding his authority. However, he held the positions of Head of State, Commander-in-Chief, and ultimate authority when Nigeria overturned its most democratic election. The easy targeting of the deceased Abacha is a cowardly act and a blatant misrepresentation of history. Even more tragically, he tries to pin some of the blame on Abiola, whose mandate he stole, claiming Abiola’s political decisions led to the annulment. He writes, “There were claims that Abiola had compiled a list of military officers to retire upon assumption of office, and this caused apprehension within the ranks.” This is gaslighting at its worst—a desperate attempt to manufacture justification for a blatant act of electoral robbery. Adding insult to injury, Babangida ludicrously accused NEC Chairman Professor Humphrey Nwosu of deliberately stopping the election results announcement. He wrote, “Professor Nwosu, in his wisdom, chose to stop the announcement of results, which unfortunately led to further confusion.” This is as ludicrous as it is ridiculous. Nwosu performed his constitutional duties under a regime with absolute authority over the process. Nigerians’ intelligence is insulted by the suggestion of the electoral commission’s independent power to end such a vital national event, disregarding the military government. Babangida’s government, which had already planned the annulment, put immense pressure and intimidation on Nwosu.Babangida’s true intentions regarding democracy become clearer when we consider his long-standing use of “Khalifa,” meaning successor, to refer to Abacha.What was the point of the election if Babangida had selected an heir apparent? Babangida’s whole transition programme is now tainted by this revelation. This implies his intention was to prevent the June 12 election, misleading Nigerians to simulate a democratic handover while secretly preserving military rule.Babangida’s claim to accept responsibility is a cleverly disguised linguistic trick. In one breath, he declares, “I regrettably take responsibility.” Yet, in another, he couches it with justifications, saying the annulment was necessary for national security. This is not a confession; it is an elaborate performance aimed at avoiding true accountability. If Babangida was genuinely taking responsibility, he would have boldly declared, “I am responsible for the annulment.” He would have apologised to Nigerians, to the families of those who lost their lives in the aftermath of June 12, and to history itself. But no such thing happened.Instead, a tragicomic scene played out in Nigeria during his book and library launch; the country’s powerful elite celebrated a man who had committed the political crime of the century. Ironically, over ₦17 billion was raised at the launch, a reward for the man responsible for one of Nigeria’s darkest chapters. Ironically, the man who subverted the people’s will through high treason was later lauded for his actions. The account in A Journey in Service is riddled with contradictions from Babangida. In one instance, he claims he was helpless in preventing the annulment because of military pressure. Yet, he also states, “I wanted a smooth transition to a democratic government, but circumstances beyond my control dictated otherwise.” Why didn’t he stand strong against these alleged circumstances if he was committed to democracy? Why did he not resist the forces that sought to undermine the democratic process? His words expose him as not a leader bound by external forces, but a man lacking the courage to follow through on his promises of change. The truth remains, regardless of book launches, crafted excuses, or political gatherings, as history demonstrates. This was IBB’s chance to admit his offenses against Nigeria and its people, seek pardon, and even offer restitution. Instead, he danced on the graves of Abiola, Abacha, and the countless Nigerians who lost their lives because of the crisis he unleashed. The legendary footballer Diego Armando Maradona dribbled his way to immortality in the annals of football. However, this time, Ibrahim Badamasi Babangida, dubbed Nigeria’s Maradona, sidestepped redemption, prioritising cowardice and deceit over courage and truth. History shall not be kind to him. Lemmy Ughegbe, Ph. D writes from AbujaEmail: lemmyughegbeofficial@gmail.comWhatsApp ONLY: +2348069716645

INCESSANT BOAT MISHAP IN...

IS THE LABOUR PARTY...

GOVERNOR OKPEBHOLO PREDICTS APC...

PRESIDENT TINUBU ORDERS IMMEDIATE...

COURT OF APPEAL RULES...

EBONYI GOVERNOR SUSPENDS 87...

INCESSANT BOAT MISHAP IN...

IS THE LABOUR PARTY...

GOVERNOR OKPEBHOLO PREDICTS APC...

PRESIDENT TINUBU ORDERS IMMEDIATE...

COURT OF APPEAL RULES...

EBONYI GOVERNOR SUSPENDS 87...

PRESIDENCY TELLS ABIOLA FAMILY TO FILE CLAIM FOR ₦45 BILLION DEBT

JUNE 12 AND THE PARADOX OF NIGERIAN DEMOCRACY: BETWEEN FOUNDATIONAL IDEALS AND POLITICAL SYMBOLISM

ABIOLA FAMILY SPEAKS OUT ON 1993 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION ANNULMENT

IBB: A JOURNEY IN DISSERVICE

PRESIDENT TINUBU ORDERS IMMEDIATE EMPLOYMENT OF.

COURT OF APPEAL RULES FRSC CAN’T.

EBONYI GOVERNOR SUSPENDS 87 OFFICIALS, INCLUDING.

INCESSANT BOAT MISHAP IN OUR WATERWAYS.

Pages

Categories

Recent Posts

GIRL CHILD EDUCATION AND SANITARY PAD SENSITIZATION CRUCIAL FOR FUTURE – PRINCESS JOY IDAM

Friday Lines (37) With: Dr Abubakar Alkali. An Open Letter to Ms Kemi Badenoch