June 12: If Abiola won, is he now a posthumous president? By Olu Fasan,
Exactly 32 years ago today, the presidential election of June 12, 1993 was annulled by the military regime of General Ibrahim Babangida that conducted the poll. Over three decades after that seismic decision, the truth, the whole truth, about why the election was annulled and who actually annulled it remains unknown.
General Babangida’s long-awaited memoir, A Journey in Service, failed woefully to settle the whodunnit question because he passed the buck and named a long-dead colleague, General Sani Abacha, who can’t defend himself, as the chief culprit, and resorted to doubtful conjectures about the motives of those he described as “the nefarious ‘inside’ forces opposed to the elections”, but mentioned none of them except Abacha. Thus, 32 years after the epoch-making decision, Babangida still could not bring himself to name any living culprit, as if none exists!
Sadly, successive civilian presidents have done nothing, beyond symbolic gestures, to bring closure to that cataclysmic period in Nigeria’s post-independence history. President Olusegun Obasanjo, who benefitted from the annulment, never once acknowledged it throughout his eight years in office. After leaving office, Obasanjo blamed the annulment on “bad belle” but ventured no details. President Yar’Adua was too unwell to consider the issue. His successor, President Goodluck Jonathan attempted to name the University of Lagos after Chief MKO Abiola, the acclaimed winner of the presidential poll, but swiftly retreated after a widespread protest against the move and did nothing again before leaving office.
To date, it was President Muhammadu Buhari who took significant decisions on the June 12 annulment. In 2018, Buhari changed Nigeria’s “Democracy Day” from May 29 to June 12 to immortalise the annulment. He went on to confer the country’s highest national honour, Grand Commander of the Order of the Federal Republic, GCFR, on Abiola and the second highest, Grand Commander of the Order of the Niger, GCON, on Babagana Kingibe, Abiola’s running mate, in addition to honouring a few other “heroes of democracy”.
Of course, Buhari’s decisions were influenced by partisan politics; first, he was under intense pressure from his party’s South-West wing, which felt more aggrieved about the June 12 annulment, to honour Abiola, their “son”; second, Buhari used the decisions to throw red meat to the South-West to score political points ahead of his re-election bid in 2019. As Professor Wole Soyinka put it at the time, Buhari’s decisions were taken “with an eye on electoral fortunes, definitely.” But Buhari’s politicisation of his June 12 decisions denied them cross-party and cross-ethnic consensus. For instance, the investiture ceremony where Abiola and other “heroes of June 12” were honoured was attended only by APC politicians and South-West leaders and traditional rulers. What was supposed to be a national affair was a partisan and ethnic one, thanks to attempts to hijack the annulment for political advantage.
But what was Buhari’s view on the reason behind the annulment? Well, while Babangida blamed “nefarious ‘inside’ forces”, singling out Abacha, and while Obasanjo blamed “bad belle”, the Buhari government said that “the unjust annulment was a huge elite conspiracy.” Yet, although the Buhari administration acknowledged the clamour for “an inquisition”, it balked at probing the annulment, leaving the identities of the “nefarious ‘inside’ forces”, the “elite conspirators” and the “bad belles” shrouded in secrecy.
However, while little is known about the behind-the-scenes shenanigans that culminated in the June 12 annulment, there’s little doubt about who won the election. The Buhari administration made clear that it was Abiola “who got the highest votes”. Even General Babangida, who previously said that “Abiola may not have won the elections”, admitted in his memoir that “upon deeper reflection and a closer examination of all the available results, particularly the detailed election results, there was no doubt that MKO Abiola won the June 12 elections.” Babangida even published the election results as an appendix to his book.
But the question is, so what? If Abiola won the election, is he now a posthumous president of Nigeria? For the avoidance of doubt, no government has officially declared Abiola as a posthumous president. In a recent article titled “IBB’s A Journey in Service: A Substantial Response” (ThisDay, May 28, 2025), Chief Abiola’s first son, Kola, said: “On that day in 2018 (when the GCFR was conferred on Abiola), our father stopped being the ‘presumed winner’ of the 1993 election to being recognised as Nigeria’s posthumous President.” But that’s false. Chief Obafemi Awolowo was a recipient of the GCFR, yet he was not a president. So, the GCFR does not automatically make Abiola a posthumous president of Nigeria.
The Constitution prescribes how someone can be declared president, and no government can unilaterally declare anyone president. Furthermore, the Supreme Court ultimately has the final say on who is president where there’s a challenge. In a recent article, Chief Afe Babalola SAN narrated that Bashir Tofa, Abiola’s rival in the June 12 election, challenged at the Court of Appeal whether Abiola was properly elected. Chief Babalola said that while he was in the court to represent Abiola, Chief Philip Umeadi SAN, representing the Federal Government, entered and told him that “the election had been annulled”. Chief Umeadi then approached the judges and said: “My Lords, there is no lis again before Your Lordships; the election has been annulled.” So, the court did not pronounce on the poll or validate Abiola’s victory. And, I say, no government can unilaterally pronounce him president posthumously.
Yet, there should be closure. So, what’s the way forward? Well, in a true democracy, where the rule of law prevails, a Judicial Commission of Inquiry, headed by a Justice of the Supreme Court, will investigate the annulment, verify the results of the elections, order the release of the results and make other pronouncements. Assuming the commission orders the recognition of Abiola as a posthumous president, then the government would announce and gazette the decision. Only then would Abiola become a posthumous president, with all the entitlements of the office posthumously accruing to him. But without that judicial process, Abiola remains the “presumed winner” of the June 12 election, and all the honours the government accords him amount to mere symbolic gestures. Sadly, that brings no closure!
Happy 90th birthday, Uncle Sam, a great legend!
I join millions of Nigerians at home and abroad to congratulate and celebrate a living legend, Mr Sam Amuka, fondly called Uncle Sam, publisher of Vanguard newspapers, who turns 90 tomorrow, June 13. For decades, I admired Uncle Sam from afar, but our paths crossed in 2018 when I started writing for this newspaper. In those seven years, I have been struck by his deep loyalty to those around him, and his utter helpfulness, being a beneficiary of both. When Vanguard turned 40 last year, I read all the reminisces of its former and current editors and writers. Everyone said the same thing: their encounter with Uncle Sam left them better off professionally and personally. Uncle Sam has a superlative word for everyone. Mine is “superstar”. I wish I merit that. Happy birthday, sir. Many happy returns!
The post June 12: If Abiola won, is he now a posthumous president? By Olu Fasan appeared first on Vanguard News.
,
Exactly 32 years ago today, the presidential election of June 12, 1993 was annulled by the military regime of General Ibrahim Babangida that conducted the poll. Over three decades after that seismic decision, the truth, the whole truth, about why the election was annulled and who actually annulled it remains unknown. General Babangida’s long-awaited memoir, A […]
The post June 12: If Abiola won, is he now a posthumous president? By Olu Fasan appeared first on Vanguard News.
, , Emmanuel Okogba, {authorlink},, , Vanguard News, June 12, 2025, 2:49 am
