Connect with us

Featured

We Can Still Rescue This Country from Strange Imposters – Atiku (See Full Speech)

Published

on

“Nigerians know more about the person sitting in office as their President and how he got there, and the dangers that it portends for them and the country. It is for them, especially the younger generation whose futures are to be shaped by that man, to decide what they want to do with the knowledge.”

Someone asked me what I would do if I lost my election petition appeal at the Supreme Court. In response, I said that as long as Nigeria wins, the struggle would have been worth the while. By that, I meant that the bigger loss would not be mine but Nigeria’s if the Supreme Court legitimizes illegality, including forgery, identity theft, and perjury.

If the Supreme Court, the highest court in the land, implies by its judgment that crime is good and should be rewarded, then Nigeria has lost and the country is doomed irrespective of who occupies the Presidential seat. If the Supreme Court decides that the Electoral umpire, INEC, can tell the public one thing and then do something else in order to reach a corruptly predetermined outcome, then there is really no hope for the country’s democracy and electoral politics.

Obviously, the consequences of those decisions for the country will not end at the expiration of the current government. They will last for decades. I am absolutely sure that history will vindicate me. We now know what the Supreme Court has decided.

At critical points in my political life, I always ignored the easy but ignoble path and chosen the difficult but dignified path, the path of truth, of morality, of democracy and rule of law.

I always chose freedom over servitude, whatever the personal discomforts my choice entails. When I joined politics, the critical challenge was easing the military out of power so that civilian democratic governance could be restored in Nigeria. It later became a very defining struggle, and, as one of the leaders of that struggle, I was targeted for elimination.

In one incident, nine policemen guarding my home in Kaduna were murdered in an attempt to assassinate me. I was also forced into exile for nine (9) months. In addition, my interest in a logistics company that I co-owned was confiscated and given to friends of the military government. As Vice President in the civilian government that succeeded the military, I, again at great personal cost, chose to oppose the extension of the tenure of the government beyond the two four-year terms enshrined in our constitution.

In response to the official backlash against me, I instituted several cases in the courts, which led to seven landmark decisions that helped to deepen our democracy and rule of law. At the current historic moment, the easier option for me would have been to fold up and retreat after the mandate banditry perpetrated by the APC and INEC.

But I went to the Nigerian courts to seek redress. I even went to an American court to help with unravelling what our state institutions charged with such responsibilities were unwilling or unable to do, including unravelling the qualifying academic records of the person sworn in as our President and by implication, hopefully who he really is.

I offered that evidence procured with the assistance of the American Court to our Supreme Court to help it to do justice in this case. I give this background to underscore that what we are currently dealing with is bigger than one or two presidential elections and is certainly bigger than Atiku Abubakar. It is not about me; it is about our country, Nigeria. It is about the kind of society we want to leave for the next generation and what kind of example we want to set for our children and their children.

It is about the reputation of Nigeria and Nigerians in the eyes of the world. We showed incontrovertible evidence that Bola A. Tinubu was not qualified to contest the Presidential Election because he forged the qualifying academic certificate, which he submitted to INEC. In fact, a simple check of Tinubu’s past records in its possession would have shown INEC that Tinubu broke the law and should not have been allowed to contest the election.

We showed irrefutable evidence of gross irregularities, violence, and manipulations during the elections. We showed incontrovertible evidence that INEC violated the Electoral Act and deliberately sabotaged its own publicly announced processes and procedures in order to illegally declare Tinubu elected. The position of the Supreme Court, even though final, leaves so much unanswered.
Even the rebuke by retired Justice Musa Dattijo Muhammad is a confirmation from within the apex court that all is not well with the Supreme Court. The court and indeed the judiciary must never lend itself to politicization as it is currently the norm with nearly every institution in Nigeria. By the way, the strong rebuke of the apex court by the revered Justice, who had meritoriously served for more than four decades, should not be swept under the carpet.
The alarm raised by Justice Muhammad and recently, former INEC Chairman, Prof Attahiru Jega, offer Nigerians an explanation into why the electoral and judicial system have become the lost hope of the common man.

Judges are no longer appointed based on merit but are products of the interplay of politics and nepotism. Worse still, the appointment of electoral officials has also been hijacked by the ruling party as seen in the latest nomination of Resident Electoral Commissioners where card carrying members of the ruling party and aides to politicians in the APC are being appointed into INEC. When two critical institutions like the court and the electoral commission are trapped in an evil web of political machination, it becomes next to impossible for democracy to thrive.

As a stakeholder in the presidential election of February 25, I, along with other well-meaning Nigerians have done my bit in ensuring that our democratic process enjoys the privilege of full disclosure of the character deficiencies of the current political leadership. I also believe that even if the Supreme Court believes otherwise, the purpose of technology in our electoral system is to enhance transparency and not merely as a viewing centre. We have to move with the world and not be stuck in time.

Implications of PEPC and Supreme Court judgments
I leave Nigerians and the world to decide what to make of the Supreme Court’s unfortunate decision. But here’s my take. The judgments of the PEPC and the Supreme Court have very far-reaching grave implications, including the following:

One is the erosion of trust in the electoral system and our democracy. Nigerians witnessed as the National Assembly changed the electoral law to improve transparency in the process. Of particular importance was the introduction of modern technology to help eliminate the recurring incidents of electoral manipulation, particularly during the collation of results. Nigerians and the world also witnessed as the leadership of the INEC, especially its Chairman and National Commissioner for Voter Education reassured Nigerians on national television multiple times that the use of that technology would be mandatory.

Yet that same INEC undermined the use of that technology during the elections and collation process and declared as winner someone who clearly did not win the Presidential election. They then went further to take sides in the courts in a dogfight to defend their illegality. Who would convince the millions of Nigerians to vote in future elections after they suffered endlessly on queues to register to vote, to collect PVCs and to vote, based on INEC’s assurances only to see their votes stolen and given to someone they did not vote for?

When people lose trust and confidence in elections, democracy is practically on life support. And by affirming and legitimizing the continued lack of transparency in our electoral system the courts are continuing to usurp the rights of voters to elect their leaders. The other grave implication is that contestants in Nigeria’s elections should do whatever is necessary to be declared the winner. That includes identity theft, impersonation, forging of educational and other documents, perjury, and violence.

And, as they do so, they should ignore whatever the law says and whatever assurances from the leadership of the electoral umpire about what the law says and what they would do in compliance. And they would do so knowing that our courts would approve of their behaviour or at best pretend not to take any notice of it. The third is that if you are robbed of victory, do not bother going to court for redress because your glaring evidence of the robbery will be ignored in favour of the mandate bandit.

Also, your lawyers, however distinguished and accomplished, may be ridiculed by the judges who may also go out of their way to make even a stronger case for the so-called “winner” than even their own lawyers were able to do. These are clearly self-help strategies and actions bereft of the law and constitutionalism. Only lawlessness and anarchy will result from such, with violence, destruction and implosion and loss of our country likely to follow.
I believe that we still have a small window to prevent these from happening. I still believe that we can rescue this country from the strange imposters that have seized it illegally and are holding it by the jugular. Let me caution that the leaders of those African countries that have completely collapsed into chaos never came together one day and agreed to collapse their countries. Rather their countries collapsed because of the incremental and compounding individual and collective utterances and actions of those leaders.

Nigerians know more about the person sitting in office as their President and how he got there, and the dangers that it portends for them and the country. It is for them, especially the younger generation whose futures are to be shaped by that man, to decide what they want to do with the knowledge.

Now, let me give a historical perspective to the constitutional evolution that gave birth to the 1999 Constitution. In the build up to the current democratic dispensation, agitation was rife amongst members of the political class and a large number of civil society bodies to envision a constitution that would operate a democracy in a functional order after the nasty military regimes. These agitations and necessities of the circumstance of that time led to the convocation of the 1995 Constitutional Conference, which I was privileged to be a part of, alongside other prominent political actors.

The Constitutional Conference was expected to create the frameworks upon which a new constitution would be built in order to make the dreams of a democratic society. A number of far-reaching reforms and recommendations were made, which drew from our past experiences and aimed at safeguarding the new constitution from the mistakes of the past.

One such headline recommendation was the concept of rotational presidency anchored on the principle of 6 years single term among the 6 geopolitical blocks. Even the notional idea of delineating the country along geo-political blocks was a creation of the 1995 conference. Another thematic recommendation at the conference was that the Federal Capital Territory should be given the democratic opportunity to elect for itself a mayor who shall emerge from popular franchise. These two recommendations were part of the landmark reforms that were submitted to the military government that convoked the Constitutional Conference.

However, and rather disappointingly, the government that midwifed the current democratic dispensation and enacted what is now known as the 1999 Constitution, expunged these two recommendations from what eventually became the body of legislation to govern our fledgling democracy.

As for me and my party this phase of our work is done. However, I am not going away. For as long as I breathe I will continue to struggle, with other Nigerians, to deepen our democracy and rule of law and for the kind of political and economic restructuring the country needs to reach its true potential. That struggle should now be led by the younger generation of Nigerians who have even more at stake than my generation.

So, let me make a few proposals that I believe will help. We can urgently make constitutional amendments that will prevent any court or tribunal from hiding behind technicalities and legal sophistry to affirm electoral heists and undermine the will of the people. Our democracy must mean something; it must be substantive. Above all, it must be expressed through free, fair and transparent elections that respect the will of the people.

Firstly, we must make electronic voting and collation of results mandatory. This is the 21st century and countries less advanced than Nigeria are doing so already. It is only bold initiatives that transform societies.
Secondly, we must provide that all litigation arising from a disputed election must be concluded before the inauguration of a winner. This was the case in 1979. The current time frame between elections and inauguration of winners is inadequate to dispense with election litigations.

What we have currently is akin to asking thieves to keep their loot and use the same to defend themselves while the case of their robbery is being decided. It only encourages mandate banditry rather than discourages it.

Thirdly, in order to ensure popular mandate and real representation, we must move to require a candidate for President to earn 50% +1 of the valid votes cast, failing which a run-off between the top two candidates will be held. Most countries that elect their presidents use this Two-Round System (with slight variations) rather than our current First-Past-the-Post system.
Examples include France, Finland, Austria, Bulgaria, Portugal, Poland, Turkey and Russia, Argentina, Brazil, Ivory Coast, Sierra Leone, Namibia, Mozambique, Madagascar and even Liberia where a run-off is expected to hold in the coming days.

Fourthly, in order to reduce the desperation of incumbents and distractions from governing and also to promote equity and national unity, we need to move to a single six-year term for President to be rotated among the six geo-political zones. This will prevent the ganging up of two or more geo-political zones to alternate the presidency among themselves to the exclusion of other zones.

INEC should be mandated to verify the credentials submitted to it by candidates and their parties and where it is unable to do so – perhaps because the institutions involved did not respond in time – it must publicly state so and have it on record.

A situation where a candidate submits contradictory credentials to INEC in different election cycles and the electoral umpire accepts them without question points to gross negligence, at best, or collusion to break the law by the leadership of the INEC, at worst. The submission of contradictory qualifying documents by a candidate as well as those found to be forged or falsified should disqualify a candidate even if the falsification or forgery is discovered after the person had been sworn into office.

The burden of proving that a document submitted to INEC is forged should not be on the opposing candidates in the election. It is never the responsibility of an applicant for a job to prove that the person who eventually got the job did so with forged documents.

In addition to these proposed constitutional amendments, the Electoral Act should be amended to provide that, except where they explicitly violate the Constitution and other laws, the rules and procedures laid down by the electoral umpire and made public for the benefit of the contestants and the voters will be treated as sacrosanct by the courts in deciding on election disputes.

A referee cannot be allowed to set the rules for the game only to change or ignore them when one side has scored a goal or is about to win the match. We must restore confidence in our electoral system which the current leadership of INEC has completely eroded and undermined. Also, we need well-thought out provisions in the legislation and regulations to reform the judiciary, including the introduction of an automated case assignment system; transparency in the appointment of judges; a practice directory that stresses that the goal of judges in election cases should be to discover and affirm voters’ choice rather than disregarding voters’ choice for the sake of technicalities.

There should also be publicly available annual evaluation of the performance of judges using agreed criteria. By improving the transparency of the electoral process and reducing the incentives to cheat, in addition to transparency in the appointment of judges and other judicial reforms, the number of election petitions as well as corruption in the judiciary will be significantly reduced. More importantly, we would have succeeded in taking away the right to elect leaders from the courts and return it to the voters to whom it truly belongs.

Gentlemen of the Press, I thank you profoundly for listening. May God bless you, and may God bless the Federal Republic of Nigeria.

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

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

Featured

Umahi Apologises to Tinubu, Lagosians, Denies Knowledge of Bridge Closure

Published

on

By

The Minister of Works, Senator Dave Umahi on Thursday, said the closure of Independence Bridge in Lagos for urgent rehabilitation of the collapsed retaining wall was made without his knowledge or authorization.

Umahi said this while apologising to Lagos residents and President Bola Tinubu for the disruption caused by the sudden closure of the bridge on Wednesday.

Umahi who spoke when he toured the bridge in Lagos said: ” Unfortunately, when the bridge was to be closed, I was not informed. It is very unfortunate because for a bridge to be closed, especially in Lagos, as has been the tradition, I should be informed as the minister.

“We should also have studied the implication of it even in an emergency situation. We would have deployed emergency evaluation of the implication of closing the bridge.”

Umahi warned that controllers of works and engineers would face disciplinary action if such an incident would happen again.

“I use the opportunity to warn all controllers and engineers all over the country. Never you close a road or close any bridge without running through the permanent secretary, who will seek for permission from the honourable minister of works,” he said.

The minister acknowledged the efforts of Lagos State Government in managing traffic flow during the closure.

He also took responsibility for the error, saying: “I take responsibility for it, even though I did not order it, but every action by any staff of the ministry of works, I take responsibility for it.”

Umahi said that the closure, which caused significant traffic congestion, was avoidable.

He said: “If we were to do this properly, there would have been a different kind of method deployed and it wouldn’t have necessitated the total closure.”

According to him, even if closure was necessary, it would have been done in a way that it would take three days: Friday, Saturday, Sunday, and necessary remedial work would have been put in place.

“What we are doing now is to restore the bridge temporarily within the next three days. By Sunday, this place will be totally open.”

He added that a permanent solution would be implemented after a two-week assessment.

“Then, after two weeks, we will look at the settlements, and then we will take out three days to put the permanent structure. That is what we are going to do,” he said.

The minister emphasised the competence of the contractor handling the project, Build Well.

“Build Well is a reputable company, and they have been restoring a lot of failures on our bridges in Lagos, some of them 53 years old.

“Some bridges’ spans have been lifted, especially Eko Bridge, Marina Bridge, and even the Lagos-Ibadan Bridge. They are also intervening in all of them,” he added.

The minister also said that the design of the bridge would be varied to address the emergency situation.

He said: ” The design will be varied according to the emergency situation we have on ground, and the contractor is going to cooperate with us.”

He pledged to personally oversee the restoration efforts, saying, “I am not going until the bridge is fully restored by Sunday, we will work day and night to restore it, and then we will evaluate it.”

The bridge was initially closed on April 1 for essential maintenance and rehabilitation works, with the government planning to complete the repairs by May.

NAN

Continue Reading

Featured

Communal Clashes: Adeleke Threatens Royal Fathers with Dethronement

Published

on

By

Osun State Governor, Senator Ademola Adeleke, has threatened stern state action against traditional rulers of Ifon, Erin Osun and Ilobu communities if they fail to sustain current peace, and de-escalate the crisis in their communities.

The Governor issued the warning against the backdrop of online reports that some faceless groups across the conflict areas are planning another round of attacks.

“In the midst of sallah celebrations, I got reports of some people planning another round of conflict around Ifon, Ilobu and Erin Osun towns. The security agencies have tightened surveillance to ensure no attacks take place.

“The security agencies are also speeding up the interrogation of key chieftains and actors in the conflict. I will remind top leaders of the towns that the peace undertaking they are signing are not for joke. They will be held accountable. There will be accountability before the law.

“The curfew we relaxed was on humanitarian grounds. As a compassionate government, we know many innocent people are suffering because of the evil agenda of a few elements across the conflict areas. Any attempt to exploit the adjustment of the curfew for renewed violence will be met with full re-imposition of the 24-hour curfew.

“Additionally, I will remove from office, any traditional ruler where violence recurs. This card is on the table. Royal fathers of each town must call their subjects to order. I will wield the big stick. Enough is enough”, the Governor was quoted as saying in the statement.

Continue Reading

Featured

Celebrating a Hero of June 12, Humphrey Nwosu

Published

on

By

By Eric Elezuo
In as much as unnecessary controversy ensued in the Senate when some senators led by the Senator representing Abia South, Enyinnaya Abaribe, sponsored a motion to honour and immortalise Professor Humphrey Nwosu, the electoral officer in charge of organising and conducting the June 12, 1993 General Elections; the highly freest and fairest elections in the history of Nigeria, many Nigerians have stood stoutly the defend the late electoral officer’s conduct, concluding that he deserved to be honoured for his meritorious service to nation, especially as the substantive Chairman of the then National Electoral Commission (NEC).
The election held, but was truncated by the former Military President, General Ibrahim Babangida (retd) at the announcement of results stage.
Those, who joined the Abia South Senator to jointly sponsor the motion were Abba Moro (PDP, Benue South), Orji Kalu (APC, Abia North), Austin Akobondu (PDP, Abia), Adamu Aliero (PDP, Kebbi Central) and Victor Umeh, (LP, Anambra Central).Others are Okechukwu Ezea (LP, Enugu North) Osita Ngwu (PDP, Enugu West), Onyekachi Nwebonyi (APC, Ebonyi North) Anthony Ani, Osita Izunaso (APC, Imo West) Patrick Ndubueze (APC, Imo North).

However, as the motion hit the floor of the senate through a point of order, majority of the members fought against it, and finally had their way after a voice vote as supervised by the Deputy Senate President, Jibrin Barau, giving verdict to the ‘nays’.
The Senate threw out prayers contained in the motion as it sought to honour Prof Nwosu by renaming the Independent National Electoral Commission headquarters after him. The rejection was the second time in quick succession, in less than 24 hours.
In the heated debate before the proposal was thrown out, Abaribe, while presenting the proposal, noted that Nwosu stood his ground to conduct the June 12, 1993 elections despite threats from military dictatorship.
“His courageous defense of democratic electoral process during the 1993 presidential elections led to the famous June 12, which ultimately confirmed Alhaji M.K.O Abiola as the winner of the election.“He stood his ground, ensuring that Nigeria’s electoral wishes and aspirations were realised, which culminated in June 12 being marked as the authentic democracy day due to his unwavering stand as an umpire.

“Professor Humphrey Nwosu laid a landmark foundation for the present independent National Electoral Commission today and that Professor Humphrey Mwosu passed away on the 20th of October 2024, aged 83 years old.

“Despite his contributions, Professor Humphrey Mwosu was seemingly neglected until his death, which highlights complaints of unfair treatment of notable public servants,” he added.

In support of the motion, Senator Osita Ngwu that “there was no way he would have announced the results with a gun to his head. That doesn’t change the fact that some of us see him as a hero.”

Senator Austin Akobundu described it as most uncharitable for lawmakers to dismiss Nwosu’s contributions, insisting that he deserved a place in Nigeria’s hall of honour.
On his part, Tony Nwoye representing Anambra North under Labour Party, accused senators of deploying personal, political and ethnic sentiments to judge the motion.“We should not allow our personal sentiments and party affiliation to affect our judgement. I was a presiding officer during the June 12 election. He did his best despite the court order. Despite the threats by the military cabal, he went ahead to announce the election. It is very disappointing that some of us are distorting facts because Nwosu is an Igbo man,” he said.

Among the several senators, who opposed the immortalisation motion, with excuses of Nwosu’s lacking courage to announce final results, were Senator Jimoh Ibrahim from Ondo State, who stated categorically that “nothing should be named after him”, Senator Cyril Fasuyi, who argued that history does not reward efforts, but only results, saying “As long as he did not announce the result, whether under duress or not, I am against naming INEC headquarters after him”, Senator Sunday Karimi, who criticised Nwosu for lacking the courage to speak out; Senator Afolabi Salisu, who said that immortalising him would undermine the memory of MKO Abiola, Senator Adams Oshiomhole and Senator Adeola Olamilekun, who claimed he lost his brother in the aftermath.

But Nigerians have argued in favour of the immortalisation of the former chief electoral officer, admonishing that he did his job very well. Most of them reasoned that if the likes of Babagana Kingibe, the running mate to Abiola, who ditched the struggle to join the government of General Sani Abacha, could be honoured with a GCON honours, the second highest in the land, how much more the proponent of the most viable option to voting, Option A4.

In his accessment, celebrated journalist and Chairman of Ovation Media Group, Chief Dele Momodu, said Nwosu performed his duty to the very best of his abilities, and very well. The well traveled journalist wondered on what pedestal the opposing senators stand to deny him honours.

Also lending his voice to the immortalisation of Prof Nwosu, the Aare Onakakanfo of Yoruba land, Iba Gani Adams, said all honours Abiola is enjoying today is credited to Nwosu’s honesty.

“It is very important that Prof. Humphrey Nwosu should be recognized, the genesis of having a free and fair or the foundation of having a free and fair June 12, 1993 elections was through having a sincere NEC chairman like Humphrey Nwosu.

“Humphrey Nwosu conducted free and fair election that gave Aare MKO Abiola the mandate that the Nigerian government then did not install him as president.

“And the respect and the glory that Aare MKO Abiola is having today is as a result of the honesty displayed by the then NEC chairman and the products that worked with him that made it happen,” he said.

HUMPHREY NWOSU AND JUNE 12 DEBACLE 

Nigeria’s electoral umpire during the period leading to the June 12 debacle, Prof Humphrey Nwosu, appears to be one of the few democracy apostles, who have been neglected, when heroes of June 12 struggle are mentioned. This is no longer a case of ‘either by commission or omission’, but a typical example of by “commission and omission”, going by feelers coming out from members of the upper chamber. Nwosu was a man who had nothing to gain or lose by doing the right thing; and he went ahead to do the right thing.
Professor Humphrey Nwosu, who was born on October 2, 1941, and died on October24, 2024, was chairman of the National Electoral Commission (NEC), as it was then called. He was appointed by President Ibrahim Babangida in 1989, and held the office till 1993, when the election was annulled. He replaced Prof Eme Awa, who was said to have resigned due to a disagreement with Babangida.
Prof Nwosu is remembered for his administrative and organizational prowess, inventing the popular Option A4 system that ensured optimum transparency during the June 12, 1993 Presidential Election between MKO Abiola of the Social Democratic Party (SDP) and Uthman Tofa of the National Republican Convention (NRC). He persevered in announcing of the results even as tension from unknown quarters were rife. He abandoned the results after his life was threatened, according to reports.
Prof Nwosu became a Professor of Political Science at the University of Nigeria, Nsukka, and served in the government of Samson Omeruah, who was governor of old Anambra State. Among his highs in office were assisting traditional rulers to gain staffs of office, receive salaries and settled intra and inter community land disputes. He also served as chairman of a Federal Technical Committee on the application of Civil Service Reforms in the local government service.
Nwosu conducted the June 12, 1993 election which was seen as the freest and fairest election till date in which Chief Moshood Abiola was presumed to have won. Nwosu’s commission introduced the novel Option A4 voting system and the Open ballot system.
Nwosu had released many of the election results when he was ordered to stop further announcement by the military regime.
In 2008, he published a book in which he claimed that Babangida was not to blame for annulling the election. The book was severely criticized for failing to accurately account for what happened, and that could explain the reason behind his sudden oblivion in the political and social circle as well as why he has not been recognised as champion of democracy, and June 12 in particular.
Noting that the story of heroism attached to June 12 is not complete without Prof Nwosu, a pro-Igbo youth group, Coalition of South East Youth Leaders (COSEYL), urged President Bola Tinubu to honour the former NEC chairman. They believe that he played a vital role prior, during and after the elections of 1993.
In a press statement by its President General, Mr. Goodluck Ibem, the group said: “A team that wins a match scored by one of the players was not made possible only by the player who scored the goal. The winning came as a result of the input of other players.
“That a free and fair election was conducted by National Electoral Commission, NEC, on June 12, 1993 was made possible because a man who believed in transparency and integrity was at the helm of affairs of the electoral body at that time.“We must tell ourselves the truth that, if not for the impeccable integrity of Professor Humphrey Nwosu who conducted a free and fair election where Nigerians from all works of life, tribe and religion spoke their minds through the ballot box, there won’t be any Democracy Day to celebrate today,” the group noted.Also, the Conference of Nigeria Political Parties (CNPP) called for the overdue recognition of Prof Nwosu.The CNPP in a statement signed by its Deputy National Publicity Secretary, Comrade James Ezema, highlighted the pivotal role played by Prof. Nwosu in Nigeria’s democratic journey.

The CNPP lamented the continued exclusion of Prof. Nwosu from the list of heroes celebrated on Democracy Day, despite his significant contribution to the nation’s democracy through the introduction of the Option A4 voting system.

“It is time to transcend petty biases and to embrace the spirit of inclusivity that Professor Nwosu’s legacy warrants,” the association of all registered political parties noted.

An online platform, Businessday.ng once captured Prof Nwosu’s contribution as follows:

In the middle of the night of June 10, 1993, an Abuja High Court presided over by Justice Bassey Ikpeme, in breach of the relevant decree, ordered the electoral body to put on hold the presidential election that was some 36 hours away from happening.

The plaintiff in the case was an unregistered body known as the Association for Better Nigeria (ABN) , which consisted of a group of politicians generally believed to have government backing. Nwosu took the risk of his life and found his way in the morning uninvited to a meeting of the MILITARY COUNCIL, ASO VILLA, to explain the grave consequences of Ikpeme’s indiscreet pronouncement. After intimidation and harassment of Prof and other deliberations at the uninvited meeting, it was agreed that NEC could discount Ikpeme’s order and continue with its arrangements and preparations for the elections.

At the end of voting, when it became clear from the majority of the results already collated from the states that the candidate of the then Social Democratic Party (SDP) Bashorun M.K.O. Abiola could not be stopped from winning the contest, the then Chief Judge of Abuja, Justice Dahiru Saleh ordered NEC to halt the process. Again, Nwosu stormed the Aso Villa, but this time, he found that the government had withdrawn their support.

The then Attorney General of the Federation (AGF) Clement Akpamgbo, who gave Nwosu legal backing earlier, did not only ditch him but also ensured that a bench warrant to arrest Nwosu issued by the Chief Judge of Abuja was duly served. From then, Nwosu became labelled as the problem, while his Electoral Commission was formally suspended forthwith. The only other option left to Nwosu was to seek judicial cover from the Court of Appeal, Kaduna Division, headed by Justice Achike. With no one else behind Nwosu except the Commission’s vibrant Director of Legal Services, Bukhari Bello, with Chief Tony Ojukwu SAN, OFR, one time Executive Secretary, National Human Rights Commission. NEC drew attention to an earlier judgment by a higher court in which Oguntade JCA as he then was, established two main points.

The first was that where a court makes an order in a case where it lacked jurisdiction, the order was null and void; and second, that it was unnecessary to go on appeal in such circumstance.

This suggested that Nwosu had no business obeying the erroneous decisions of the lower courts. Interestingly, NEC produced in Court the COMPLETE RESULTS OF THE ELECTION, which he had been stopped from announcing and which confirmed the victory of MKO Abiola. The real problem was that some ambitious military fellows aided by a set of compromised politicians wanted to prolong military rule. At this point, the government, sensing that it might lose the case, decided to annul the election a few hours before the judgment of the Court of Appeal.

Prof Nwosu is an apostle of democracy, and of June 12, 1993 more especially,  and deserves to be honoured and celebrated.

In his tribute at the burial of Prof Nwosu, President Tinubu, though acknowledged that the deceased upheld democratic principles, he was however, silent on any form of honour for the June 12 chief electoral officer. He noted:

“As we mourn the death of Prof Humphrey Nwosu, we are invited to celebrate him for his profound accomplishments and personal fulfilments as a public administrator, political scientist, and academics icon. We are urged to reflect on his democratic ideals and his sense of commitment to a democratic Nigeria. These are the hallmarks of his life and times that will be cherished beyond this generation,” Tinubu said, through his representative, the Minister of Works, Engr. Dave Umahi.

As the south east governors prepare to meet and present their proposition of honoring Nwosu before President Tinubu, Nigerians have said that whatever the situation, Nwosu remains and etched in the hearts and minds of the real heroes of democracy and June 12; the average Nigerians, as democratic force to reckon with, and a man without whose name the story and history of the freest and fairest election in Nigeria cannot be written.

According to Yusuf John Imam, who wrote from Abuja, in an article titled Senate’s failure to immortalize Humphrey Nwosu, disservice to democracy, “if the Senate cannot honour Nwosu, then every state in the Southeast should take it upon themselves to immortalize their son. Build monuments, name streets, and establish scholarships in his name. Push his narrative and celebrate his legacy. The Southeast must rise to the occasion and ensure that their son’s legacy is preserved for generations to come.”

The bottom-line remains that Professor Humphrey Nwosu is a hero of June 12, and deserve to be honoured, immortalised and celebrated.

Continue Reading

Trending

Close