Connect with us

Headline

Back to History: Read IBB’s Full Speech Annulling June 12

Published

on

Today marks 25th anniversary of what has been termed the freest and fairest election in Nigerian history. Nigerians were said to have voted massively in an election that would have seen late MKO Abiola emerge as winner, until it was annulled by General Ibrahim Babangida (then Military Head of State).

SEE BABANGIDA’S FULL TEXT BELOW

Fellow Nigerians, I address you today with a deep sense of world history and particularly of the history of our great country. In the aftermath of the recently annulled presidential election, I feel, as I believe you yourself feel, a profound sense of disappointment at the outcome of our last efforts at laying the foundation of a viable democratic system of government in Nigeria.

I therefore wish, on behalf of myself and members of the National Defence and Security Council and indeed of my entire administration, to feel with my fellow countrymen and women for the cancellation of the election. It was a rather disappointing experience in the course of carrying through the last election of the transition to civil rule programme. Nigeria has come a long way since this administration assumed power and leadership about eight years ago. In the attempt to grapple with the critical and monumental problems and challenges of national existence and social progress, this administration inaugurated and pursued sound and justifiable policies and programmes of reform. These policies and programmes have touched virtually all aspects of our national life – the economy, political process, social structures, external relations, bureaucracy and even the family system.

I believe strongly that in understanding, conception, formulation and articulation, these policies and programmes are not only sound but also comparatively unassailable. I believe too that history, with the passage of time, would certainly score the administration high in its governance of our country. Let me also express my deep conviction that the core strategy and structures of our reform policies and programmes, as enunciated in 1986/87, would, for a very long time, remain relevant and durable in the course of changing our country positively. I believe that at the exit of the administration from power, we would leave behind for prosperity a country with an economy, the structures of which have been turned around for good. The average Nigerian person has come to reconcile himself with the fact that his or her social progress remains essentially in his or her hands in collaboration with other fellow Nigerians and not merely relying on what government alone could provide for him or her. The days are gone for good, when men and women trooped to government establishments for employment and for benevolence.

This administration has built the foundation that would take Nigerians away from their previous colonially-induced motivations and the encumbrances of colonialism. We have laid the foundation for self-reliant economic development and social justice. We have established a new basis in our country in which economic liberalization would continue to flourish alongside democratic forces and deregulated power structure. In all these, the average Nigerian person has more than ever before this administration imbibed and assimilated the values of hard work, resilience and self-confidence. It is true that in the course of implementing our reform policies and programmes and especially because of the visionary zeal with which we approached the assignment and responded to incidental pressures of governance, we engendered a number of social forces in the country. This is so because we sought to challenge and transform extant social forces which had in the past impeded growth and development of our country.

We also sought to deal with the new forces to which our programmes of action gave rise. Thus in dealing with the dynamics of both the old and new social forces, we ran into certain difficulties. In particular, during the course of handling the interlocking relationships between the old and new political forces and institutions, some problems had arisen leading us into a number of difficulties and thereby necessitating our having to tamper with the rules and regulations laid down in the political programme. As a result, the administration unwittingly attracted enormous public suspicions of its intentions and objectives.

Accordingly, we have experienced certain shortfalls and conflicting responses to the pulls and pushes of governance in the course of policy implementation. I believe that areas of difficulties with the transition programme, especially from the last quarter of 1992 to the recent cancelled presidential election, derived primarily from the shortfalls in implementing the programmes of actions which, though objectively taken, may have caused a deviation from the original framework and structure of the programme.

Fellow Nigerians, it is true that by the cancelled presidential election, we all found the nation at a peculiar bar of history which was neither bargained for, nor was it envisaged in the reform programmes of transition as enunciated in 1986/87. In the circumstance, the administration had no option than to respond appropriately to the unfortunate experience of terminating the presidential election. Our actions are in full conformity with the original objectives of the transition to civil programme. It was also in conformity with the avowed commitment of the administration to advance the cause of national unity, stability, and democracy. In annulling the presidential election, this administration was keenly aware of its promise in November 1992 that it would disengage and institute a return to democracy on August 27, 1993.

We are determined to keep the promise. Since this transition, and indeed any transition, must have an end, I believe that our transition programme should and must come to an end, honestly and honourably. History will bear witness that as an administration we have always striven, in all our policy decisions, to build the foundation of lasting democracy. Lasting democracy is not a temporary show of excitement and manipulation by an over-articulate section of the elite and its captive audience; lasting democracy is a permanent diet to nurture the soul of the whole nation and the political process. Therefore, it is logical, as we have always insisted upon, that lasting democracy must be equated with political stability. Informed by our sad experience of history, we require nothing short of a foundation for lasting democracy.

As an administration, we cannot afford to leave Nigerian into a Third Republic with epileptic convulsions in its democratic health. Nigeria must therefore confront her own reality; she must solve her problems notwithstanding other existing models of democracy in other parts of the world. In my address to the nation in October 1992, when the first presidential primaries were cancelled, I had cause to remind our country men and women that there is nowhere in the world in which the practice of democracy is the same, even if the principles are similar and even for countries sharing the same intellectual tradition and cultural foundation. The history of our country is not the history of any other country in the world which is either practising advanced democracy or struggling to lay the foundation for democracy.

Yet, in spite of the uniqueness and peculiarities of Nigeria, there are certain prerequisites which constitute an irreducible minimum for democracy. Such essential factors include: A. Free and fair elections; B. Uncoerced expression of voters preference in election; C. Respect for electorate as unfettered final arbiter on elections; D. Decorum and fairness on the part of the electoral umpires; E. Absolute respect for the rule of law. Fellow Nigerians, you would recall that it was precisely because the presidential primaries of last year did not meet the basic requirements of free and fair election that the Armed Forces Ruling Council had good reason to cancel those primaries. The recently annulled presidential election was similarly afflicted by these problems. Even before the presidential election, and indeed at the party conventions, we had full knowledge of the bad signals pertaining to the enormous breach of the rules and regulations of democratic elections.

But because we were determined to keep faith with the deadline of 27th August, 1993 for the return to civil rule, we overlooked the reported breaches. Unfortunately, these breaches continued into the presidential election of June 12, 1993, on an even greater proportion. There were allegations of irregularities and other acts of bad conduct leveled against the presidential candidates but NEC went ahead and cleared them. There were proofs as well as documented evidence of widespread use of money during the party primaries as well as the presidential election. These were the same bad conduct for which the party presidential primaries of 1992 were cancelled. Evidence available to government put the total amount of money spent by the presidential candidates at over two billion, one hundred million naira (N2.1 billion). The use of money was again the major source of undermining the electoral process. Both these allegations and evidence were known to the National Defence and Security Council before the holding of the June 12, 1993 election, the National Defence and Security Council overlooked these areas of problems in its determination to fulfill the promise to hand over to an elected president on due date.

Apart from the tremendous negative use of money during the party primaries and presidential election, there were moral issues which were also overlooked by the Defence and National Security Council. There were cases of documented and confirmed conflict of interest between the government and both presidential candidates which would compromise their positions and responsibilities were they to become president. We believe that politics and government are not ends in themselves. Rather, service and effective amelioration of the condition of our people must remain the true purpose of politics. It is true that the presidential election was generally seen to be free, fair and peaceful.

However, there was in fact a huge array of electoral malpractices virtually in all the states of the federation before the actual voting began. There were authenticated reports of the electoral malpractices against party agents, officials of the National Electoral Commission and also some members of the electorate. If all of these were clear violations of the electoral law, there were proofs of manipulations through offer and acceptance of money and other forms of inducement against officials of the National Electoral Commission and members of the electorate. There were also evidence of conflict in the process of authentication and clearance of credentials of the presidential candidates.

Indeed, up to the last few hours of the election, we continued, in our earnest steadfastness with our transition deadline, to overlook vital facts. For example, following the Council’s deliberation which followed the court injunction suspending the election, majority of members of the National Defence and Security Council supported postponement of the election by one week. This was to allow NEC enough time to reach all the voters, especially in the rural areas, about the postponement. But persuaded by NEC that it was capable of relaying the information to the entire electorate within the few hours left before the election, the Council, unfortunately, dropped the idea of shifting the voting day. Now, we know better. The conduct of the election, the behaviour of the candidates and post-election responses continued to elicit signals which the nation can only ignore at its peril.

It is against the foregoing background that the administration became highly concerned when these political conflicts and breaches were carried to the court. It must be acknowledged that the performance of the judiciary on this occasion was less than satisfactory. The judiciary has been the bastion of the hopes and liberties of our citizens. Therefore, when it became clear that the courts had become intimidated and subjected to the manipulation of the political process, and vested interests, then the entire political system was in clear dangers. This administration could not continue to watch the various high courts carry on their long drawn out processes and contradictory decisions while the nation slides into chaos. It was under this circumstance that the National Defence and Security Council decided that it is in the supreme interest of law and order, political stability and peace that the presidential election be annulled.

As an administration, we have had special interest and concern not only for the immediate needs of our society, but also in laying the foundation for generations to come. To continue action on the basis of the June 12, 1993 election, and to proclaim and swear in a president who encouraged a campaign of divide and rule among our ethnic groups would have been detrimental to the survival of the Third Republic. Our need is for peace, stability and continuity of politics in the interest of all our people. Fellow countrymen and women, although the National Electoral Commission and the Centre for Democratic Studies officially invited foreign observers for the presidential election, the administration also considered it, as important as a democratic society, that our activities and electoral conduct must be open not only to the citizenry of our country but also to the rest of the world.

In spite of this commitment, the administration did not and cannot accept that foreign countries should interfere in our internal affairs and undermine our sovereignty. The presidential election was not an exercise imposed on Nigerians by the United Nations or by the wishes of some global policemen of democracy. It was a decision embarked upon independently by the government of our country and for the interest of our country. This is because we believe, just like other countries, that democracy and democratization are primary values which Nigerians should cultivate, sustain and consolidate so as to enhance freedom, liberties and social development of the citizenry. The actions of these foreign countries are most unfortunate and highly regrettable. There is nowhere in the history of our country or indeed of the third world where these countries can be said to love Nigeria or Nigerians any more than the love we have for ourselves and for our country. Neither can they claim to love Nigeria any more than this administration loves our country.

Accordingly, I wish to state that this administration will take necessary action against any interest groups that seek to interfere in our internal affairs. In this vein, I wish to place on record the appreciation of this administration for the patience and understanding of Nigerians, the French, the Germans, the Russians and Irish governments in the current situation. I appeal to our fellow countrymen and women and indeed our foreign detractors that they should cultivate proper understanding and appreciation of the peculiar historic circumstances in the development of our country and the determination not only of this administration but indeed of all Nigerians to resolve the current crises. Fellow Nigerians, the National Security and Defence Council has met several times since the June 12, 1993 election.

The council has fully deliberated not only on our avowed commitment but also to bequeathing to posterity a sound economic and political base in our country and we shall do so with honour. In our deliberations, we have also taken note of several extensive consultations with other members of this administration, with officers and men of the Armed Forces and with well-meaning Nigerian leaders of thought. We are committed to handing over power on 27th August, 1993.

Accordingly, the National Defence and Security Council has decided that, by the end of July 1993, the two political parties, under the supervision of a recomposed National Electoral Commission, will put in place the necessary process for the emergence of two presidential candidates. This shall be conducted according to the rules and regulations governing the election of the president of the country. In this connection, government will, in consultation with the two political parties and National Electoral Commission, agree as to the best and quickest process of conducting the election. In the light of our recent experience and, given the mood of the nation, the National Defence and Security Council has imposed additional conditions as a way of widening and deepening the base of electing the president and sanitizing the electoral process.

Accordingly, the candidates for the coming election must: (1) Not be less than 50 years old; (2) Have not been convicted of any crime; (3) Believe, by act of faith and practice, in the corporate existence of Nigeria; (4) Possess records of personal, corporate and business interests which do not conflict with national interests; (5) Have been registered members of either of the two political parties for at least one year to this election. All those previously banned from participating in the transition process, other than those with criminal records, are hereby unbanned. They can all henceforth participate in the electoral process. This is with a view to enriching the quality of candidature for the election and at the same time tap the leadership resources of our country to the fullest. The decree to this effect will be promulgated.

Fellow Nigerians, I wish to finally acknowledge the tremendous value of your patience and understanding, especially in the face of national provocation. I urge you to keep faith with the commitment of this administration. I enjoin you to keep faith with the unity, peace and stability of our country for this is the only country that you and I can call our own. Nowhere in the world, no matter the prompting and inducements of foreign countries, can Nigerians ever be regarded as first class citizens. Nigeria is the only country that we have. We must therefore renew our hope in Nigeria, and faith and confidence in ourselves for continued growth, development and progress

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Headline

The Search for Justice: ADC vs Tsoho

Published

on

By

By Eric Elezuo

From the first day the African Democratic Congress (ADC) took a new shape in July, 2025, in readiness to wrest power from the government of the day, crises, allegedly engineered by the President Bola Tinubu-led All Progressives Congress (APC), have remained its lot.

From the struggle for leadership positions to the fight to save itself from deregistration, the hitherto coalition and main opposition party, has remained in a battle for its life and existence. And has not relented in the search for lasting justice. This time, it has taken the law itself to court to ensure that justice is not only done, but seen to have been done.

It would be recalled that shortly after the the party ratified the election of Senator David Mark and Ogbeni Rauf Aregbesola as Chairman and Secretary of the party respectively, skirmishes were noticed among the rank and file of the party as a supposedly former deputy national chairman of the party, Nafiu Bala Gombe, claimed chairmanship of party, saying that since the founding chairman had resigned, it is constitutionally incumbent upon him to automatically assume the chairmanship role.

Gombe’s claims came on the heels of his ‘resignation’ from office, which paved the way for a new national executive of the party to be constituted. But his claims did not deter the party from carrying on with the formation and running of the party, including holding a keenly contested presidential primary election, which produced His Excellency, the former Vice President Atiku Abubakar. So Gombe went to court. Yet, Mark and Aregbesola carried on the running of the party.

As a result, Gombe had approached a court for an order restraining Mark leadership from parading themselves as leaders of the ADC pending the hearing and determination of his suit challenging their leadership.

He had also asked the court to issue another order against the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), restraining it from recognizing the Mark leadership.

But in his ruling in the interlocutory application, Justice Emeka Nwite ordered Gombe to put the defendants on notice so that they appear before the court to show cause, why the application should not be granted.

Rather than appearing before the trial court to show cause, the defendant appealed to the Abuja division of the Court of Appeal, challenging the jurisdiction of the trial court to dabble into the matter they described as internal matters of the ADC.

The appellate court in dismissing the appeal for lacking in merit, ordered accelerated hearing in the suit and further ordered all parties to maintain status quo ante bellum.

Dissatisfied, Mark had approached the appellate court but, his appeal was dismissed and the matter returned to the trial court.

With the to and from nature of the cases involving the ADC leadership crisis, the party has accused judges of bias in favoring party detractors and disobedience to court rules among other malice, the party has taken a new route to obtain the much eluded justice, and that involves charging the custodians of the law to court.

Consequently, the ADC has filed a lawsuit before a High Court in Abuja involving the Chief Judge of the Federal High Court, Justice John Tsoho, over concerns arising from the ongoing leadership dispute within the party.

Also joined in the suit is the National Judicial Council (NJC), which the party said had not addressed issues it raised regarding the handling of a case challenging the leadership of former Senate President, Senator David Mark, within the ADC.

The lawsuit, dated June 4, 2026, was filed by the National Welfare Secretary of the ADC, Nkemakolam Ukandu, who is seeking to be joined in Suit No: FHC/ABJ/CS/1819/2025 instituted by Nafiu Bala Gombe against the Mark-led leadership of the party.

According to the suit, Ukandu expressed concerns about the handling of the matter and alleged that the actions of both Justice Tsoho and Justice Peter Lifu, the judge assigned to hear the case, could affect confidence in the proceedings.

The lawsuit further stated that the assignment of the case to Justice Lifu stirred concerns among some members of the party, who believe the process may not guarantee a fair hearing.

The legal action marks a fresh twist in the leadership dispute within the ADC, which has attracted significant political attention ahead of the 2027 general elections.

 

 

Aside Justice John Tsoho, other defendants are the National Judicial Council (NJC), and Justice Peter Lifu, a judge newly assigned to hear the suit challenging the Senator David Mark-led leadership of ADC.

The plaintiff, who was seeking to be joined in the Suit No: FHC/ABJ/CS/1819/2025, brought by Nafiu Bala Gombe against the Mark-led leadership, accused the chief judge and Lifu of manifest bias, and willingness to do the biddings of persons against the interest of the party.

Ukandu, in the suit he personally filed at the Federal High Court, Abuja, faulted the chief judge for reassigning the suit to Lifu, in alleged disregard of the orders of the Supreme Court as well as Justice Emeka Nwite of the Abuja division of the Federal High Court, who initially heard the suit brought by Gombe against the party.

The plaintiff, in the suit marked FHC/ ABJ/ CS/ 1165/2026, recalled that an appeal from an interlocutory decision of Nwite rose to the Supreme Court, wherein the apex court on April 30, 2026, “made an order of remittance of Suit No: FHC/ABJ/CS/1819/2025: Nafiu Bala Gombe VS. ADC & 4 ORS back to Justice Emeka Nwite for continuation of hearing of pending applications challenging the jurisdiction of the trial court.”

He stated that upon resumption of hearing before Nwite, the plaintiff wrote to the chief judge praying for a reassignment of the matter to another judge of the Honourable Court.

Ukandu stated, “All the defendants’ counsel, including counsel to the applicants seeking to be joined in this matter, opposed the said application by the plaintiff’s counsel and Hon. Justice Emeka Nwite thereafter adjourned the matter sine die pending the service of the said letter by the plaintiff’s on all the parties in the matter, outcome of the letter by the 2nd defendant and the furnishing of the CTC of the judgement of the Supreme Court to the court.

“Without complying with the orders of the Supreme Court and Hon. Justice Emeka Nwite, the 2nd Defendant in abuse of his judicial powers reassigned this matter,” to Lifu.

He added that the third defendant, on his part, pretending not to see the order of Nwite, went ahead and fixed the matter for hearing for June 3, 2026.

Ukandu further recalled that ADC had on May 7 informed the public through a press release that the chief judge had planned to reassign the case to another judge favourable to the plaintiff.

He said the party had “warned against such unethical practice but the 2nd Defendant despite the public outcry reassigned the suit to the 3rd Defendant who have been nick-named as ‘Wike Judges’.”

He stated that the third defendant had started presiding over the matter, despite taking judicial notice of the orders of the Supreme Court and Nwite, and that the matter came up for hearing before the third defendant.

Though neither the Federal High Court nor the National Judicial Council had publicly responded to the issues raised so far, it is imperative to to state that the ADC appears to have lost interest in both the judiciary,  which it believe is kowtowing to the dictates of Gombe, and by extension the body language of the Federal Government.

The ADC appears to have managed to draw the sympathy of the public as a group known as the Grassroots Mobilization Network (GMN), has lent their voice to the supposed injustice leveled against the Mark-led ADC, raising concerns about the handling of the matter, and calling for transparency in the judicial process.

The group alleged that the judiciary was being used to target opposition parties.

The group expressed concern over what it described as growing public distrust in the judiciary and called on relevant authorities to ensure fairness and transparency in the handling of politically sensitive cases.

While Nigerians await the outcome of the litigation, and other resolution of other sundry issues arising from the ADC and the judiciary, the party is going ahead making last minute transparent efforts to nominate a suitable running mate to bear the presidential flag with the presidential candidate, Atiku Abubakar.

Among the party’s shortlists are the first runner-up in the presidential primary, Rotimi Chibuike Amaechi, Mrs. Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, Akinwumi Adesina, Emeka Ihedioha, Emeka Nwajiuba and Chief Dele Momodu.

Continue Reading

Headline

Gunmen Abduct Ex-Power Minister Adelabu’s Sister, Her Two Sons in Ibadan

Published

on

By

Suspected gunmen have abducted the sister of a former Minister of Power, Adebayo Adelabu, in Ibadan, the Oyo State capital.

The family of former minister and chieftain of the All Progressives Congress (APC) confirmed the abduction, disclosing that Mrs. Olaide John-Paul and her 12-year-old twin sons were kidnapped by the gunmen on Wednesday, June 3, 2026.

According to a statement issued by Adelabu’s media aide, Femi Awogboro, the victims were kidnapped at about 7:30am while Mrs. John-Paul was taking her children to school.

Mrs. John-Paul, the youngest of five children of Mrs. Olufunmilayo Aduke Adegoke Adelabu, reportedly retired voluntarily from her career at First Bank Pension Custodian in 2025 before relocating to Ibadan with her children.

She was said to be making arrangements to join her husband, who had earlier relocated to the US.

The family expressed deep concern over the development but stated that security agencies had already commenced efforts to rescue the victims and apprehend those responsible.

“We are pleased to confirm that security operatives have swung into action and preliminary investigations have commenced in earnest,” the statement partly read.

While appealing for calm, the family urged members of the public to refrain from spreading unverified information that could undermine ongoing rescue operations.

“We are deeply distressed by this unfortunate incident, but remain hopeful that the victims will be rescued safely. We appeal to the public to remain calm, avoid speculation and support ongoing efforts with prayers,” the statement added.

The family also called on anyone with useful information that could aid the rescue operation to promptly share such intelligence with security agencies through the appropriate channels.

It assured that it would continue to cooperate fully with law enforcement authorities and provide updates as investigations and rescue efforts progress.

Continue Reading

Headline

Adeboye Proposes 90 Days Ultimatum for Security Chiefs to Eradicate Terrorism or Resign

Published

on

By

The General Overseer of Redeemed Christian Church of God (RCCG), Pastor Enoch Adeboye, has called on the Federal government to issue a 90-day ultimatum to security chiefs to end terrorism in Nigeria or step aside.

Adeboye made the appeal in a video shared on his X (formerly Twitter) account on Tuesday, expressing deep concern over the country’s deteriorating security situation.

He emphasized the need for urgent and decisive action, stressing that security chiefs must be held accountable for tangible results in the fight against terrorism.

According to him, while citizens can only advise the Commander-in-Chief, it is within the government’s power to set clear expectations and timelines for security leaders.

“If I were to make a suggestion, I would say the government should act swiftly and direct the service chiefs to eradicate terrorists within 90 days or resign,” he said.

The cleric also urged authorities to go beyond targeting terrorists alone, insisting that their sponsors must equally be identified and dealt with, regardless of their social or political influence.

“When issuing directives, it should be made clear that both terrorists and their sponsors must be eliminated, no matter how powerful they are,” he added.

Adeboye recalled that a former Nigerian president had once issued a similar three-month directive to security chiefs to end the Boko Haram insurgency but failed to enforce the order after the deadline expired.

Reflecting on his interaction with the late president, Adeboye noted that although initial efforts were made, the lack of follow-through undermined the directive’s effectiveness.

He maintained that his current recommendation is informed by that experience, urging the government to ensure strict enforcement if such a timeline is adopted.

His comments come amid renewed concerns over persistent terrorist attacks, banditry, and kidnappings across the country, with increasing public pressure on authorities to take stronger action against insecurity.

Continue Reading

Trending