15 Jun 2008 |
|
Humphrey Nwosu's Book: Dead On Arrival A BOOK is ordinarily a great thing, and although Professor Humphrey Nwosu's version of the June 12 story which was formally presented to the public on Thursday, June 12 was most deserving of public attention, the book suffered a terrible fate that should not befall a book of its nature or any book at all: it died on arrival. It was ruined by the politics of its author, and the circumstances of its presentation, with the sad effect that those who have not even read the book at all have already concluded that the politics behind it is objectionable. Professor Nwosu should have allowed the book to speak for itself and the reviewers to do their job, but in statements he made before and during the presentation, and through excerpts of the book already published in some newspapers, he gave the book away. The main misfortune is that there is nothing in the book, as summarised by the author himself, that Nigerians do not already know. Nigerians expected Professor Nwosu, as Chairman of the National Electoral Commission (NEC) which conducted the controversial June 12, 1993 election to come up with some original revelations, but he has not done so, instead he has managed to rub salt into the people's injury, offering in place of hard truths, a combination of truths, diplomatese and rank opportunism. Respondents to the book are justifiably angry. In presenting the book titled: "Laying the Foundation for Nigeria's Democracy: My account of June 12 1993 Presidential Election and its Annulment", Nwosu, fifteen years after the fact, announced the results of that election. According to him, MKO Abiola won the election with a total vote of 8, 323, 305 scoring a third of the votes in 28 states out of the then 30 states, while his rival, Bashir Tofa scored a total of 6, 073, 612 votes, with at least one-third of the votes cast in 23 states. Thus, Chief MKO Abiola was the winner of that election. So is this what Professor Nwosu has waited for 15 years to say? The beauty of the Option A4 voting system that was used in the 1993 Presidential election was its openness which made it possible for results to be collated openly and simultaneously and indeed, despite the suspension of the announcement of results and the susbsequent annulment of the process, the exact results were well-known. The Abiola campaign machinery was so well-equipped that SDP polling booth agents were all armed with mobile, 090, phones, as expensive as that analogue mobile phone was then, and as results were being collated, they called their campaign headquarters to phone in the results. The media, as well as election monitors, local and international, had also provided at the time, more than enough evidence to show that MKO Abiola was the winner of the election. Professor Nwosu argues that the hands of NEC were tied because of an Abuja High Court ruling which stopped it from continuing with the annoucement of results. And that NEC's appeal was still pending while the body was dissolved by the military junta. Again, it is common knowledge that the Babangida regime used the courts to violate the people's will and to subvert the rule of law. The role of the judiciary under the military was most tentative as rogue judges enjoyed the protection of the soldiers to turn the temple of justice into an arena for politics. Nwosu may trace his silence to his respect for the rule of law, but we all know that at the time, even the courts were on trial. Civil society had decried the abuse of the judiciary and the growth of a mercenary band of jurists under the military. But when the popular rebellion against the annulment of the June 12 election began, where was Nwosu? He is most eloquent now about how June 12 is the foundation of Nigerian democracy and how June 12 should be made Demcracy Day, where was he when men and women of courage stood at the barricades, and stood up to the military? Why tell us 15 years after that a dead man won an election? It has taken him 15 years to look for the most convenient and the safest possible time to speak. This does not show courage, it shows cowardice. Nwosu, if indeed he believed in June 12, could have issued a statement at the time; he could in fact have joined the pro-democracy activists. Imagine the chief electoral umpire standing on the side of NADECO, marching alongside the likes of Abubakar Umar, Bola Ige, Abraham Adesanya, Adekunle Ajasin, Gani Fawehinmi, Olisa Agbakoba, Ebitu Ukiwe, Dan Suleiman, Tunji Braithwaite etc., protesting that he had helped to lay a foundation for democracy and that he would not stand by and allow that foundation to be destroyed. He would have strengthened the case for democracy. Professor Nwosu in recent interviews, has said that he chose to keep quiet because other players have been on the scene and he did not want to be accused of stealing the thunder from other people's fire. Let him admit this fact: he was driven by fear. He was afraid of Abacha, he dared not speak; he was afraid of IBB, he dreaded the consequences of taking on a wounded General, he was afraid of Obasanjo, he avoided anything that could displease the man while he reigned; and he was afraid of those anti-June 12 forces that he writes about. He is clever isn't he? If others had allowed fear to rule their hearts, June 12 would not have developed into the phenomenon that it became, it would not have emerged as the foundation for democracy; its annulment would have been just another coup by the military - that was one coup that consumed the Nigerian military elite as post-June 12 realities indicated. But there is something to be said for Nwosu joining the June Twelvers now. He should be welcomed even by those who disagree with his views. There is no point telling him to shut up and go to hell as certain groups are now saying. His intervention has its uses, particularly now that the revisionists are claiming that June 12 is better forgotten. Whenever anybody makes such a statement, the progressive camp should speak up so loudly that those naysayers would not dare raise their voice, and as many voices as are speaking for democracy, the better, and that should include even the dumb who have regained the gift of speech. And this is what has happened in the last week. Former Head of State General Abdusalami Abubakar was reported as having said that June 12 should be forgotten but when he got such a barrage of attacks coming from the civil society, he quickly had to redeem himself by blaming the media for misquoting him. Ready excuse? It would be nice to have someone play on national radio, the recorded tape of the General's original statement. Even without this, it is enough that General Abdusalami Abubakar has declared that he never said June 12 should be forgotten. That's good news. Nwosu's declaration of MKO Abiola as winner of the June 12 Presidential election has no legal effect. But it should interest the Yar'�dua administration enough for the President to order fresh investigations into what happened to June 12. The President can demand to know all the facts, so that it will no longer be a matter of hearsay. If the government is interested in electoral reforms, it needs to know what happened in the past, so that in designing a new system, old pitfalls can be avoided. In addition, the Federal Government as Nigerian government owes the people a formal recognition of the importance of June 12 in Nigeria's political evolution. Nations create their own moments and icons in order to establish needed values and preserve history. The Martin Luther King phenomenon was first denied by forces within the American system, but today the United States has a Martin Luther King Day. A June 12 Day or an MKO Abiola Day would be most appropriate to represent the collective struggle of Nigerian democrats against the forces of tyranny. Professor Nwosu had promised to address the annulment of June 12 in his book. But he ended up doing an IBB whitewash. He says General Ibrahim Babangida was in support of June 12 but that the election was annulled by a cabal within the military led by General Sani Abacha. Again, Nwosu's identification of General Abacha as a June 12 villain provides a sharp contrast to the terrible claim by Generals Muhammadu Buhari, Abdusalami Abubakar and Ibrahim Babangida on June 8 that Abacha was committed to the development of Nigeria. A man who opposed the democratic process, and contributed to the implosion of the country for his own selfish reasons could not have been a patriot. Nwosu has named some members of the cabal but there is nothing new in this. It is common knowledge that the military hierarchy always had its own internal battles, between the hawks and the doves, and since independence, the hawks have always had their way until they ran into a ditch with June 12. What is noteworthy is that some of the people fingered by Nwosu are today in high places in Nigeria, and are occupying key positions as democrats. David Mark is Senate President, Murtala Nyako is a state Governor: it is convenient for both men to deny knowledge of the annulment of June 12. Since nobody is accepting responsibility, everybody can claim innocence, and in Nigeria, not enough questions are asked about the past of those who present themselves for public office. The greater value of Nwosu's book therefore, is that the story of June 12 has not yet been fully told; other critical stakeholders in what happened should be encouraged to write their own stories too; perhaps in the interplay of perspectives lies the whole truth about individual and institutional omissions. But if other people annulled the June 12 election, then what did General Babangida do? The Nwosu book launch was dominated by the IBB crowd. Chief Ernest Shonekan and General Babangida were billed to be Chairman and Guest of Honour respectively. Halilu Akilu who represented IBB at the event said "we haven't set eyes on or heard from Professor Nwosu for 14 years". Who is he saying that to? General Babangida has been busy trying to rescue himself from the odium that the annulment of the June 12 Presidential election brought upon him. Seminars have been organised, books have been written, interviews have been published: all to give Ibrahim Babangida an opportunity to run away from the blame of June 12. Professor Nwosu cannot claim not to know this, so why tie his book to Babangida's politics? Not even Omo Omoruyi who has many questions for Professor Nwosu, and which Nwosu has obviously not answered in his new book, was smart enough not to fall into that trap in his own June 12 account titled The Trials of June 12. The buck stopped at Babangida's table. Everyone knew him as Maradona. If the Maradona could not use his skills to save the nation when it mattered most, then what kind of Commander-in-Chief was he? By suggesting that IBB's subordinates took the decision to annul the June 12 election, Nwosu is actually saying that IBB is a coward. Did anyone put a gun to his head? Who is that person? And did Maradona beg for his life to be spared, and so he approved the annulment of a process that had been completed? The Professor of Political Science ought to be reminded that he is telling a recent and familiar story. If IBB did not oppose June 12, why did he, the great Maradona, encourage the Association for Better Nigeria (ABN), Jonathan Atkins and the likes, and all the IBB-must-stay hidden and known persuaders? In 1993, General Babangida lost a good opportunity to be a great Nigerian leader, seeking to impose his innocence on Nigerians, through all means, even 15 years later is a futile adventure.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
# 
Your Comments
Please make The Square an enjoyable experience for everyone by refraining from gratuitous ad-hominem contributions, defamatory comments and off-topic posting. Such posts will be removed.