Connect with us

Headline

US-based Academic, Prof Adesegun Banjo Who Tried To Overthrow General Abacha Is Dead

Published

on

 

By Adewale Adeoye

Former University don, Prof Adesegun Banjo, the June 12 hero who led the attempt to overthrow late General Sani Abacha through armed insurrection passed on quietly penultimate week. In this report, Adewale Adeoye reports on a life of war, intrigues and sacrifices that came to an abrupt end.

He died with a bundle of untold history

The reporter begins the story on a painful, personal note. I knew Prof Adesegun Banjo. I met him around 1996. He was in exile in Ghana. My first meeting with him was dramatic. The late Sanni Abacha’s government had placed a bounty on his head. He was wanted dead or alive. His offence was treason. Prof Adebanjo had truly planted to overthrow the government of Sani Abacha following the ancient axiom that disobedience to an illegitimate order is just. I can only remember a handful of Nigerians that made the sacrifices this Professor of Human Anatomy made to the campaign against totalitarian rule in Nigeria.

The crusade started in the United States, (US) where he had worked as a surgeon. He had saved some 4million dollars through dint of hard work, Spartan discipline, self-denial of the good things of life and support from his charming wife. He then went into the open market. He purchased 3000 rifles, several sub-machine guns, thousands of medical equipment and kits. He even bought machines that could make several bullets. He bought medical equipment for the soldiers he planned to recruit in case they sustained injuries. How successfully beat the security operatives in Europe and America where he may have sourced the weapons.

His calculation followed three years of planning and several reconnaissance home visits. He took his time to study the barracks and the locations of the sentry. At Dodan Barracks, Ikeja and Ojo Cantonments, he took special interests with the hope of seizing them and converting them to his command posts.

He had a near perfect plan. He would bring in the weapons through the sea and land, launch a blitzkrieg of military assaults on important military installations. He would then launch a grand attack beginning from a rural community. From his calculation, he needed few men to start to be tripled after taking over the radio stations and making announcements for more to join the rebellion.

He kept his masterplan to his chest. With his calculation, he would take Lagos in days, followed by Ibadan and then he would move to Abuja. He already had field men in the Niger-Delta and in the Middle Belt and in some parts of the North. The effort was to be coordinated by him. Prof Banjo felt the military had to be overthrown by all means. He raised personal funds, recruited American soldiers including a Vietnamese Major who first trained him in Guerilla warfare. He wanted to build a small, swift and mobile army that would, within the shortest time storm Nigeria and destabilize the military high command.

He was a man of martial intrigues. In the days of his campaign, he suspected everything human; flying objects and creeping things. He was a man driven by suspicion and he had the habit of looking at his quest from one corner of his eyes as if suspecting you were holding a gun or that he had a pistol hidden under his trademark French suit. In Ghana, I had an extensive interview with him. A stocky and strongly built man by all standards, he wore the fierce mien of a revolutionary and the daring eyeballs of a prowling lion.

On that day I met him in Ghana at the Teachers House, through another radical journalist, Bunmi Aborisade, I had waited for about two hours before he stormed into the room, sweating. I thought he was coming from Kumasi, some hundreds of miles away. After the meeting, he left bile on my lips. Nothing can be as devastating as a journalist holding on to an exclusive story but with the instruction never to publish.

I was in The Guardian Newspaper. His fears were genuine. The newspaper had just been closed down and then reopened. He didn’t want the newspaper to be closed again, he explained, adding that more importantly, he was not in a safe place in Ghana. Later, I saw a tainted old Renault pulled up. The driver, a short man with a chest the size of a little bulldozer opened the door for him. He jumped inside. I watched the red, tail light disappeared into the corner of Accra street, far away from the balcony where I stood in awe. It took about 10 years later for me to know that he actually came to meet me from the room next to where I had met him.

Prof Banjo endured an extraordinary punishment for his rebellion against injustice. The weapons he procured were, by accident, sighted by Beninoise Gendarmes. Initially, the security operatives praised him, promising that since the weapons were meant to fight Abacha, they would assist him. At Benin Republic, he bribed the officials to the tune of 1.5million. He was almost entering Nigeria when he got a call from Copenhagen asking him to pay some 5000 dollars. He left to raise the money but felt he should offload the goods first. It was in the process than one of the Benin Gendarmes noticed the protruding butt of a gun in the container. He raised the alarm. Banjo was picked up. At first, the officials said they would allow him to go. But information had reached Abacha.

So, the second day, the country was flooded with Nigerian top military echelon including Col Frank Omenka of the Directorate of Military Intelligence, (DMI). Local authorities told him Abacha had passed on 100 million dollars to some Beninese officials. That was how he was detained at the Port Prison. He spent 10 days amidst diplomatic manoeuvres by Nigeria to repatriate their most priced fugitive. He planned to escape with a small knife with 26-hydra heads, cutting the protective fence.

But somehow, a spy was in the midst who hinted Abuja. Within the shortest time, top security officials later told Banjo that the sum of 100million dollars was dispatched to the Benin Republic to oil the hands of officials who had sold him. But it was not going to be easy for Abacha as foreign countries were already alerted many of who did not want him killed. Banjo was bundled into a toilet, his wife separated from him. He spent 10 days in the septic tank relying on the keyhole to sniff some fresh air. He made an attempt to escape, through a jackknife he had kept in his kitty. An alarm was raised, he retreated. Thus began his ordeal. He was taken to court in the Benin Republic. He relied on the ECOWAS treaty that goods in transit must not be questioned. The judge being a Yoruba was moved by his story, especially the courage displayed by his Igbo wife who refused Amnesty offered by President Nicephore Soglo, so that she could go, leaving her husband. The Judge set them free. This was after more than one year in very harsh and dehumanizing cells. But as he walked away from the Court, a call came in from the Beninese President believed to have acted on Abacha’s prompting that he should be detained again. He and his wife were locked in a primitive toilet with constant heaps of faeces. His wife developed pterygoid plexus, an infection of the base of the brain. They spent 14 months in detention before a compassionate female judge freed them again. The two escaped to Ghana through the assistance of a Nigerian journalist, Mr Moshood Fayemiwo who paid dearly for this. Abacha’s agents later kidnapped Fayemiwo who was brought to Nigeria and detained at the office of Directorate of Military Intelligence, (DMI).

When he died peacefully penultimate Wednesday, after protracted struggle with cancer, a bundle of history untold, died with him. The family is yet to make official announcements. Many of his friends and colleagues are yet to be informed. He lay in the mortuary as at press time, but family sources say he will be buried in May this year.

“I had 120 young men stationed at the Nigerian Ports Authority. They were waiting for my weapons. My plan was that if the customs found the weapons by chance, the battle would start right at the seaport”, he had told me in Ghana before he left the country after Abacha had sent a chartered aircraft to plead with him, pick him up and pay him off. When that effort failed, the government of Abacha sent two Nigerian journalists accompanied by one of Abacha’s own son. The assignment was to poison him. They feigned media practitioners who had come to interview him. Prof Banjo awed them when he stormed the venue of the interview with some 15 armed men in Accra. “I was hinted of their plans. So, I prepared for them. Throughout the interview, they were shaking like a lily,” he had told me. He said after his escape from Ghana, the Nigerian military had rounded up many of his local supporters-but some were innocent-and dumped them in the high sea, stones on their necks, no fewer than 100 of them.

One of the emissaries sent by Abacha died in mysterious circumstances in Lagos a few years after Abacha himself had kicked the bucket. History may find it difficult to record another Nigerian academic who stood so fiercely for justice through armed struggle against the military like Banjo. After consistent attempts to kill him in Ghana he had escaped to Uganda. Luckily he knew President Yoweri Museveni. They had met at Makerere University years back. But he could not help him. This forced him to run to Zimbabwe. Abacha had also secured the services of mercenaries, mostly from Saudi Arabia charged to kill or kidnap and bring him to Nigeria. His network in the international intelligence community, mostly of Yoruba stock hinted him in advance.

Unfortunately, when he returned to Nigeria in 2001, life and people became unkind to him, except the love and affection of his immediate family. He tried, but never got a good job. The government and politicians ignored him and treated him like a leper. His efforts to sustain his cancer treatment through medications did not succeed because of funds. He needed only 5 million naira to treat his kind of blood cancer which had a cure, but he could not raise a penny. But one thing is certain, Banjo, who was the immediate junior brother of the late Col Victor Banjo of the Biafra fame, is now totally free from the affliction of a society he tried so much to salvage but that never gave him recognition, not even a wreath after his last breath. His efforts, though aborted, also remain the most striking high-level radical collaborative political efforts between two arch rivals, Yoruba and the Igbo nation.

Before he died, he told me one of his regrets was that the remains of his late brother, Col Banjo lay in an unknown shallow grave, yet to be honoured, even though his covert investigations had revealed the spot is somewhere in Enugu, known only to the late Dim Odumegwu Ojukwu and his few lieutenants.

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

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

Headline

Mary Habila’s Death: Tinubu Has Failed Comprehensively, Disgracefully – Atiku

Published

on

By

By Eric Elezuo

A former Vice President, and Presidential Candidate of the African Democratic Congress (ADC), Atiku Abubakar, has lashed out at the administration of President Bola Tinubu over its prolonged silence on the death of a medical practitioner, Mary Habila, who died at the residence of the Minister of Works, Dave Umahi.

Atiku condemned the inability of the  Tinubu-led government from making any pronouncements or instituting any form of probe to unravel the cause of death since the sad incident occurred on June 27, 2026, saying the administration has failed comprehensively and disgracefully.

Atiku’s remarks are contained in a statement he released on his social platforms endorsed with his regular AA.

While not casting any blame on any particular person or entity, Atiku maintained that condolences are not enough,but must be accompanied by thorough investigation into the circumstances that led to the death of the 26 years old medical practitioner in her prime.

The former Vice President therefore called for a “credible, independent, and transparent investigation” to establish the truth, noting that “it is the refusal of the Federal Government to guarantee such an investigation that constitutes the scandal before us”.

The statement in full:

I have followed with deep sorrow and mounting concern the reports surrounding the death of Miss Mary Habila, a 26-year-old Nigerian from Nok, Southern Kaduna, who died on June 27, 2026, within the private residence of the Honourable Minister of Works, Senator David Umahi, in Uburu, Ebonyi State.

First, I extend my heartfelt condolences to the Habila family. No family should have to mourn a daughter taken in the prime of her life while also fighting simply to learn the truth of how she died.

But condolences are not enough. Nigerians deserve answers, and it is on this score that the Tinubu administration has failed, comprehensively and disgracefully.

Consider the facts that are not in dispute. A young woman died in the residence of a serving Federal Minister. For nearly two weeks, neither the Minister, nor the police, nor any arm of government said a word to the Nigerian people. It took the courage of Sahara Reporters to bring this death into public view. Three weeks after her death, no autopsy has been performed. No cause of death has been established. The investigation remains domiciled in the very state where the Minister served two terms as Governor and where his influence is beyond question.

And through all of this, silence from the Presidency. Silence from the Federal Executive Council. Silence from the Inspector-General of Police. Silence from the National Assembly. Not one word. Not one directive. Not one gesture to assure Nigerians that the life of Mary Habila matters to this government.

Instead, the Minister has been permitted to manage the narrative of a death that occurred under his own roof: issuing statements through his personal aides, deploying his private lawyers to correspond with the police, and continuing his official duties as though nothing has happened, while civil society groups, youth organisations, and the family’s own community cry out for an independent inquiry.

Let me be clear: I make no pronouncement on anyone’s guilt or innocence. That is precisely the point. Only a credible, independent, and transparent investigation can establish the truth, and it is the refusal of the Federal Government to guarantee such an investigation that constitutes the scandal before us.

A government’s first duty is the protection of life. Where a life is lost in circumstances touching a high official of state, the burden on government to act transparently is at its heaviest.

President Tinubu’s administration has instead treated this tragedy as an inconvenience to be waited out. If the death of a young Nigerian woman in a Minister’s residence cannot stir this government to act, then Nigerians must ask: whose life, exactly, does this government value?

I therefore demand the following: One, President Bola Tinubu must direct the Honourable Minister of Works to step aside immediately, pending the conclusion of investigations. This is not a punishment; it is the minimum standard of public accountability in any serious democracy. No official under this cloud should preside over a federal ministry as though it were business as usual.

Two, the Inspector-General of Police must immediately transfer the investigation from the Ebonyi State Command to Force Headquarters, with the involvement of independent forensic experts. No investigation conducted in the shadow of the Minister’s home-state influence can command public confidence.

Three, a full, independent, and internationally credible autopsy must be conducted without further delay, with the findings made public. The stalemate over the post-mortem, three weeks after this young woman’s death is an indictment of every institution involved.

Four, the family of Mary Habila must be protected from any pressure, inducement, or intimidation, and must be guaranteed unfettered access to the facts of their daughter’s death.

The measure of a nation is how it responds when the powerful are touched by tragedy and the powerless demand truth. Mary Habila was somebody’s daughter, somebody’s sister, a young professional with her life ahead of her. She was a Nigerian. Her death must not be reduced to a footnote of political convenience.

Nigeria will work again, but only when the life of every Nigerian counts, and when no one, however highly placed, stands beyond the reach of accountability.

May the soul of Mary Habila rest in peace. May her family find justice. -AA

Continue Reading

Headline

Atiku Accuses INEC of Aiding Tinubu’s Alleged One-party State Agenda

Published

on

By

Former Vice President Atiku Abubakar has accused the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) of aiding President Bola Tinubu’s agenda to weaken opposition parties ahead of the 2027 polls by granting access to a factional leader of the African Democratic Congress (ADC).

In a statement issued Monday by the Atiku Media Office, Atiku alleged that INEC’s actions amounted to partisanship and a violation of the Constitution and the Electoral Act.

The statement referenced a July 11, 2026 claim by Nafiu Bala Gombe, who “parades himself as National Chairman of the African Democratic Congress (ADC)”, that he had succeeded in uploading the names of his candidates on INEC’s portal.

According to Atiku’s office, uploading candidates is part of the process for the 2027 General Elections, made possible by access codes granted to political parties in line with INEC guidelines.

“Meanwhile, INEC has been mum, and has not denied or confirmed this obvious contradiction to the law and its own guidelines,” the statement said.

Atiku’s team argued that by granting an access code to Bala Gombe, INEC was recognizing a “pretender” despite having “since validated the chairmanship of the Sen. David Mark-led exco.”

“By granting access code to Bala Gombe, a pretender, laying claims to the chairmanship of the ADC, though the law is not on his side and INEC has since validated the chairmanship of the Sen. David Mark-led exco, the electoral umpire is once again manifesting its partisanship,” the statement noted.

It drew parallels with a past incident under Prof. Joash Amupitan-led INEC, alleging the commission “illegally removed the names of the duly recognised ADC exco following the judicial rascality of Justice Lifu in ignoring a superior ruling of an appellate court.”

The statement described the “so-called ‘successful’ uploading of ‘candidates’ by Nafiu Bala Gombe” as lacking legal basis.

“Nafiu Bala Gombe is not recognised as ADC Chairman. Mark is duly recognised. Can there be two recognised Chairmen of a political party? Possibly only in an INEC led by Amupitan. Can INEC grant two access codes to a political party? Certainly not,” it added.

Atiku’s office warned that the development “is a recipe for crisis and confirms that Prof Joash Amupitan was appointed to enable the weakening of the opposition parties by creating crisis even where none exists.”

Citing the law, the statement noted that Section 222 of the 1999 Constitution (as amended) provides that candidates must emerge through recognized party primaries supervised by INEC, while Section 84 of the Electoral Act 2022 requires parties to submit only one validly nominated candidate per elective office.

“Nafiu Bala Gombe and his criminal gang did not conduct any primaries. The INEC granting of access code to Nafiu Bala Gombe is unconstitutional and unlawful. The only submitted candidates known to the law are those of David Mark. Any parallel submission such as Nafiu Bala Gombe’s is null and void,” it said.

The statement called on the INEC Chairman to stop “fomenting crisis in the ADC and the other opposition parties and by so doing helping President Bola Tinubu’s agenda of total State capture.”

Continue Reading

Headline

Appeal Court Upholds Judgment Ordering INEC to Derecognise Mark-led EXCO

Published

on

By

The Court of Appeal sitting in Abuja on Monday affirmed the judgment restraining the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) from recognising or participating in any state congresses organised by committees appointed by the Senator David Mark-led caretaker leadership of the African Democratic Congress (ADC).

The appellate court decision was a split of two-to-one.

A three-member panel of the appellate court, in a lead verdict delivered by Justice Okon Abang, said it found no reason to set aside the restraining order the Federal High Court in Abuja had issued against the Mark-led ADC on April 29.

It further upheld the order of trial Justice Joyce Abdulmalik, which restrained the Mark-led executives from interfering with the tenure and functions of the party’s elected state executives.

The appellate court concurred that responsibility for conducting state congresses of political parties rests with elected state executive committees, not with the national leadership.

While Justices Abang and Donatus Okorowo gave the majority verdict barring the electoral body from acknowledging the outcome of congresses held by the Mark-led leadership of the ADC, the head of the appellate court’s panel, Justice Abba Mohammed, gave a dissenting judgment.

In his minority decision, Justice Mohammed held that the case that precipitated the restraining order bordered on a non-justiciable internal affair of a political party.

He held that the trial court was wrong to have assumed jurisdiction to entertain the matter.

Meanwhile, the Court of Appeal judgment may jeopardise the presidential candidacies of former Vice President Atiku Abubakar and other candidates who emerged through the national congress organised by the Mark-led faction of the ADC, ahead of the 2027 general elections.

It will be recalled that the High Court had, in its judgment, held that the four-year tenure of the ADC’s State Working Committees and State Executive Committees remained valid and subsisting, pending the conduct of properly constituted congresses and the convocation of a national convention.

The judgment followed a suit marked FHC/ABJ/CS/581/2026, lodged before the court by aggrieved members of the ADC.

Those behind the suit are Don Norman Obinna, Johnny Tovie Derek, Obah C. Ehigiator, Hon. Olona Yinka, Dr. Charles Idowu Omideji, Samuel Pam Gyang, and Obianyo Patrick, who told the court that they sued for themselves and on behalf of all State Chairmen and State Executive Committees of the African Democratic Congress (ADC).

Listed as defendants in the matter are the ADC; Sen. David Mark; Sen. Patricia Akwashiki; Mallam Bolaji Abdullahi; Ogbeni Rauf Aregbesola; and Prof. Oserheimen Osunbor (sued on behalf of the Caretaker/Interim National Working Committee); and INEC.

The plaintiffs had, among other things, challenged the decision of the Senator Mark-led leadership of the ADC to constitute committees for the purpose of conducting state congresses.

They challenged the validity of appointments made by the Mark-led caretaker committee, arguing that planned state congresses slated for April 2026, if conducted under the supervision of the said caretaker committee, would constitute a gross violation of the party’s constitution.

It was further the position of the plaintiffs that only duly elected party organs recognised under the party’s constitution possess the power to conduct congresses.

While agreeing with the plaintiffs, Justice Abdulmalik held that neither the 1999 Constitution, as amended, nor the Constitution of the ADC empowered the caretaker/interim National Working Committee led by Senator Mark to appoint committees for the purpose of conducting state congresses.

The court held that the claims brought before it by the plaintiffs were valid and deserving of judicial consideration, citing an alleged breach of constitutional and statutory provisions.

It held that Section 223 of the 1999 Constitution, as amended, mandates political parties to conduct periodic elections based on democratic principles, adding that Article 23 of the ADC Constitution also provides that national and state officers shall hold office for a maximum of two terms spanning eight years.

Justice Abdulmalik stressed that although courts are generally reluctant to interfere in the domestic affairs of political parties, they nonetheless intervene where there is a clear allegation of violation of constitutional or statutory provisions. Political commentary articles

She held that evidence before the court established that the tenure of the state executive committees of the ADC remained valid and must be allowed to run its full course without interference.

The court stressed that only those elected structures have the authority to organise state congresses, and it accordingly nullified any process initiated by the Senator Mark-led caretaker leadership.

Earlier, the court dismissed a preliminary objection filed by the defendants challenging the competence of the suit and the court’s jurisdiction to entertain it.

It held that the subject matter of the plaintiffs’ action pertained to the affairs of INEC and therefore fell within the jurisdiction of the Federal High Court under Section 251 of the 1999 Constitution, as amended.

The court also waved aside the defendants’ contention that the plaintiffs failed to exhaust internal dispute resolution mechanisms before instituting the action.

It held that the plaintiffs had the requisite locus standi (legal right) to file the suit.

The appellate court, while upholding the restraining order, said it had a duty to intervene so as to “prevent anarchy and ensure the survival of democracy in Nigeria.”

It cited a recent Supreme Court judgment in the leadership crisis rocking the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) to hold that the ADC case could not be classified as a domestic affair of a political party.

“Once a complaint before the court is anchored on a constitutional infraction, the shield of internal affairs drops and the veil is lifted for judicial intervention,” Justice Abang added in the majority judgment.

Consequently, the panel dismissed the appeal marked CA/ABJ/CV/608/2026, which the ADC lodged in order to set aside the high court judgment.

It held that congresses and the national convention conducted by the Mark-led ADC amounted to a nullity as they were held in disobedience to a subsisting order that the High Court made on April 14.

Having resolved the case against the ADC, the appellate court awarded a cost of N10million against the party.

Shortly after the judgment, the ADC, which was represented by its National Welfare Secretary, Mr Nkem Ukandu, said the party would take the case before the Supreme Court.

Continue Reading

Trending