Stephen Adewale
There is a cliché that history is sometimes whatever the winner decides to write. As far as June 12, 1993 presidential election is concern, the winner in this context is not the late Abiola, but those alive telling the June 12 story from whatever perspective. For generations to come, its complexities will prick conscience and the event of 1993 will continue to remind the nation of an opportunity bungled. No matter who tells the June 12 story, more strands would remain untreated and unexplored. And more questions would pop up begging for answers.
It is so because June 12 has ceased from being just a historical event to becoming history in itself, which is told to suit the interest of any narrator. When we think the most authentic account of that event has been heard, we find ourselves evaluating all we think we know. Indeed, such is expected considering the legion of state and non-state actors, who made it what it is. For reasons still considered self-serving, the dramatis personae brazenly altered the course of Nigeria’s history in a manner that left the country permanently on edge. By so doing, the nation’s survival was perpetually left at the mercy of sociopolitical and economic connections, instead of an orderly system that guarantees a future for all. That is the tragedy of June 12, an election many believed could have launched Nigeria on the path of seriousness. While its symbolisms are defining, its place in the nation’s narrative is only disputed by a few.
Over the years, I had read a good number of books on June 12. I had read Abraham Oshoko’s “June 12: The struggle for power in Nigeria,” Frank Kokori’s “The struggle for June 12,” Omo Omoruyi’s “The tale of June 12: The betrayal of the Democratic rights of Nigerians,” Wale Oshun’s “Clapping with one hand,” Kayode Fayemi’s “Out of the shadows: Exile and the struggle for freedom and democracy in Nigeria,” Joe Igbokwe’s “Heroes of struggle” and Professor Wole Soyinka’s “The open sore of a continent.” All of these books are enlightening and unique but none has been able to reveal the story behind the annulment.
The latest I read on the subject is Professor Humphrey Nwosu’s book entitled, “Laying the Foundations for Nigeria’s Democracy: My Account of June 12, 1993 Presidential Election and its Annulment.” This is the account of a state actor who was not just a witness to history but also a creator of history. As the Chairman of the then National Electoral Commission (NEC) some 26 years ago, he could pass for a repository of all happenstance of that period. I was not thinking of writing a column on him until the book was given to me a week ago, and I was warned that it was sickening to read. It truly was. The book I am sure, was meant to educate Nigerians and the world at large about the June 12 saga that gave him the glory as the electoral umpire that presided over the freest and fairest election in Nigerian history. Undoubtedly, the role he played is an important part of the history of our nation.
Unfortunately, like some other self-serving and flattering books that have been written before his, Professor Nwosu’s book turns out to be all fictionalised history as he embarked on a self-serving agenda absolving General Ibrahim Babangida of blame in the annulment of the June 12 Presidential election. He turns himself into a martyr, a victim of powers-that-be while he conveniently forgot that some 26 years ago, he was the one who had the power to decide whether the result should be announced or withheld.
If I could excuse Nwosu’s bravery deficiency, 26 years ago, I cannot accept his attempt to launder the image of General Ibrahim Babangida. It is quite irritating to read Nwosu saying it is apparent that some military colleagues of Babangida who in the first instance were against the conduct of the June 12, 1993 presidential election and who were outwitted by the combined efforts of the military president and NEC, during the NDSC meeting of June 11, 1993 caused the election to be annulled. He went on to blame late General Sani Abacha, Brigadier General David Mark, Vice Admiral Murtala Nyako, late Sir Clement Akpamgbo (SAN), General Halilu Akilu and General Joshua Dongoyaro among others as those responsible for the annulment while he conveniently forgot the fact that Babangida bears the sole responsibility for annulment of the June 12 election, as the buck stopped on his desk.
His would not be the first attempt to change the narrative about Babangida as many others who served under the discredited ex-military strongman have made unsuccessful attempts to rewrite the history of the Nigerian Maradona. These people seem to be perennially divorced from the reality Nigerians live through, and presenting a fictitious book to the general public is a result of such alienation. They inform us these days that we should appreciate and pray for Babangida rather than blaming him for the June 12 saga. Asking us to appreciate and pray for a man who made a choice that led to the death of numerous individuals is an exploitation of collective religiosity, an underhanded tactic to seal our mouths from challenging the farce they stage in 1993.
Nwosu claimed he was a victim of circumstance. He argued that those of us who blame him for not announcing the final official results do not know that, without him, there could not have been June 12, 1993 election. The same Nwosu, meanwhile, must have forgotten that he kept quiet for 15 years only to return to the public space with the exoneration of his erstwhile paymaster. Now, Prof. Nwosu, his memory probably addled by his years in hibernation, claimed that he and Babangida were two of the unsung heroes of the June 12.
What precisely happened in the dark hours of June 1993 has remained an urban lore till date. If Nigerians are filling the gaps in historical communication with speculation, gossip, and media reports, people like Nwosu should know better than insulting our intelligence with distorted and exaggerated narrative. They should supply valid information, simple.
From Dino Melaye writing a book on corruption to Prof. Nwosu writing to exonerate General Babangida, there seems to be no end to the number of absurdities daily visited on Nigerians. Like many political jobbers in Nigeria who constantly engage in a public ritual of self-vindication by writing obnoxious books, Nwosu too is seeking absolution. He is embarking on a self-exoneration and the annual remembrance of June 12 gave him the best opportunity to legitimise his revisionism.
Nwosu and his ilk can try as hard as they like but they cannot rewrite public memory. We will always remember that they were the first set of people who chickened out immediately the military dogs barked in 1993. We will not forget that it took people like him 15 long years to tell us the real result of the election. We will be there to always remind him that no matter what he does to launder the image of General Babangida, he will always stay guilty as charged. The fact that Nwosu’s paymaster walks around and even tried to take a shot at the presidency in 2007 is no testimony to his innocence, only a reminder that our democracy was founded on sorrow, tears, blood, injustice, and abuse of human rights. One day, when this nation finally gets it right, people like Babangida will eventually be put in their place.
The fact that Humphrey Nwosu and his likes can carve a space in the public sphere to push for rehabilitation of their image shows that Nigeria has not been diligent enough in investigating their infamous activities. If they had been properly subjected to inquiry and their roles in past government formally determined and officially gazetted, there would have been a limit to the kind of lies they would hawk in a futile effort to change the public’s perspective of their disgraced paymasters. After all, up till now, the people who took part in the Holocaust are still being inquired even though many of them are now old and even senile. It is only in Nigeria that we have failed to find courage to do the needful on these people. No matter what they write, Nwosu and his likes are the public remains of the decomposed corpse of June 12 that was buried 26 years ago but still stinks.
The book paints the real image of what Nwosu is: Long on reputation and short on actual leadership integrity. It paints the picture of an electoral umpire who played his last card before the game even begun. What I saw was a disheartening portrait of an intellectual in power. Not as a politician but an overrated umpire expected to use his mental power to create a new pathway for the country. He came, he saw and he was conquered. His memoirs passed the verdict of history on him. He was not truthful about the great heists in Babangida’s government, he was silent on his legendary incompetence, cowardice and nonchalance, and he failed to reveal the real issues that happened behind the scenes in those hours of uncertainty. Nwosu talked about others instead. Yet, in revealing others, Nwosu succeeded in revealing himself.
Yes, by his book, we have known him!
