- We still swim in IBB’s mess – Nigerians
Following the admission of former military President Ibrahim Badamasi Babangida that late Moshood Abiola won the June 12 election in 1993, some lawyers and activists have argued that the retired General should not go scot-free because the annulment of the presidential election was a treasonable offence.
The 1993 election, widely regarded as Nigeria’s fairest, was set to declare Abiola as president before Babangida abruptly annulled the results on June 23, 1993.
The move sparked nationwide unrest and paved the way for the repressive military rule that followed.
Many pro-democracy and human rights activists, journalists and lawyers, including Chief Gani Fawehinmi, Alao-Aka-Bashorun, Femi Falana, SAN, Femi Aborisade, Debo Adeniran, Kunle Ajibade, were also incarcerated for protesting the June 12 annulment.
In separate interviews with The Point, the advocates called for the arrest and prosecution of Babangida, noting that his decision precipitated pockets of riots that claimed no fewer than 100 lives of Nigerians and wantonly destroyed public infrastructures and other citizens’ property.
Babangida, in his autobiography, ‘A Journey of Service’, launched on February 20, 2025, gave a personal account of his regime, which began on August 27, 1985 and lasted till August 26, 1993, taking responsibility for the controversial annulment of the presidential election that was won by MKO Abiola.
The former military head of state admitted that annulling the June 12 elections was the most challenging decision of his life, noting that if given another chance, he would have handled the situation differently.
His words, “That accident of history is most regrettable. The nation is entitled to expect my expression of regret. As a leader of the military administration, I accept full responsibility for all decisions taken under my watch. “June 12 happened under my watch; mistakes, oversights, and missteps happened in quick succession, but I say in my book, in all matters, we acted in the supreme national interest so that Nigeria could survive…”
Calling for Babangida’s trial in court, the chairman of the Nigerian Bar Association, Osogbo Branch, Yemi Abiona, described the former general’s action 32 years ago as criminal, maintaining that he ought to have been apprehended and prosecuted.
Abiona accused Babangida of quashing Nigerians’ will, noting that since there is no statute bar to crime, it is never late for the Federal Government to prosecute him since he is alive.
“We call on President Tinubu to prosecute General Babangida for crimes against humanity and for orchestrating a coup d’état that subverted the democratic will of Nigerians”
The legal practitioner said, “I think his (IBB) action is criminal; he has confessed now that Abiola won and they intentionally, acting under the pretence of pressure from some people, annulled the election. I think what he did is treasonable for which he should even be prosecuted for that, because he intentionally annulled the will of Nigerians and I think it is criminal and an offence someone should be investigated and prosecuted for.
“I thank God that under our law, there is no statute bar to crime; there is no time limit when someone can be prosecuted for any offence as long as he is alive, he should be made to pay the consequences of his action. I think in summary, that action alone has affected the level of democratic governance of the country negatively and up till now, we are still swimming in that mess.”
A senior lawyer, Olayinka Odufuwa, charged Nigerian leaders to learn lessons from the wrong of Babangida, saying the ex-military leader’s action only proved that the country’s leaders are “callous” and only believe in “self-interest.”
He said, “Babangida’s admission has come to show that our leaders are callous; they only believe in self-interest and not the interest of the people they govern that is what the revelation has just shown to us, that most times, elections are not won of the field but are won in the office with the interest of the people who are in power who do not want to relinquish power; that is what the revelation has just shown and I hope others will take a cue from that and learn a good lesson.”
On whether late Abiola should be given any rightful place in Nigeria’s history, Odufuwa said even though former President Muhammadu Buhari had honoured Abiola with highest title in the land, GCFR, the former presidential candidate should be immortalised so that generation yet unborn would know of his victory.
Asked if Abiola should be declared posthumously as Nigerian President, the lawyer said, “Buhari has done that and he has confirmed on him posthumously the highest order merit. So, I think that takes care of it. What they (Federal Government) can do is to immortalise his (Abiola) name so that generation coming will know that this is the man that won an election that was free and fair but was annulled. That would further confer more honourable recognition on him.”
For Abiona, Nigeria would have moved forward more than this if Abiola’s victory was not annulled.
“It is a two way thing; one way or the other there is a possibility that we (Nigeria) might have moved forward more than this if Abiola has been allowed to assume office and sworn in as the president. I believe so because the annulment of the election itself brought Nigeria back and it is one of the things that are negatively affecting our democracy now. The damage done by that action alone has not been rectified up till today. Let me look at it from this angle, that action, the confession made by IBB, I think it is criminal,” he insisted.
Sharing his thoughts about the right compensation for Abiola, the NBA boss said, “Well, he has been declared president. You know General Muhammadu Buhari awarded him posthumously, GCFR, and it is the highest award that only presidents can have.
The implication is that he has been recognised as president. This confession is just a formality; I don’t think he can be declared president posthumously because he was never sworn-in as the president. So, he (Abiola) cannot be regarded as president. He can only be regarded as an elected president but not a sworn-in president.”
Some activists, including Bright Oniovokukor, said there wouldn’t have been far reaching progress in the country if Abiola had been accepted and sworn-in as president.
He said, “I don’t think he (Abiola) would have made the much impact that Nigeria was expecting. Why is it that even the power that be, eventually annulled the election and did so many things against him, charged him for treason and some other things and they were in his party, they were his friends, they were his allies, people he wouldn’t have issues with.
“I don’t think IBB was his enemy; when the table turned, they brought a different dimension entirely so he kind of knew that these people are not truly whom they are and he now saw that the Nigerians who were rooting for him, the Nigerians who voted for him, the Nigerians who wanted a true change, a true democracy, he now realised that these are the true people that he decided to join and fight. But, unfortunately, he did not live to actualise the realisation of the things he had in mind.
“The Nigerian system is not about interest, Abiola was a rich man; he had money to throw around, he had money to support his campaign for elections which he eventually did but when it turned, he realised that people whom he thought were his friends, he thought he was in business with, were actually not what he really thought.
“The IBB that is confessing, what I noticed is that there was nothing he could have done, he couldn’t have changed the system.”
Oniovokukor also advised President Bola Tinubu to immortalise late Abiola by recognising June 12.
Giving his remarks on call for IBB’s arrest and prosecution, the activist said, “If they are calling for his arrest, I just think it would be another exercise they would fill in because the decision to annul the election was not fully by IBB alone. You will now have to start going back to the things that led to it. If it was IBB that assassinated him and is now confessing, one can say let us still try but I don’t think he is anything worth it.
“Let us just recognise the price that Abiola has paid, it was an ultimate price. They can work out anything to recognise that because if you say he was president, from when to when? But, giving him a vacuum to fill in his name but I know that if we look into the books, we can come up with a term that would definitely suit his personality and I think that will suffice,” he said.
IBB must be prosecuted – CDHR
Also, the Committee for the Defence of Human Rights made the demand for the prosecution of IBB following his recent public admission of his role in the annulment, which the group says was an attempt to “hoodwink” Nigerians into believing he acted in good faith.
“The reckless, illegal, and unconstitutional annulment of the June 12 election remains one of the gravest injustices inflicted upon Nigerians, undermining democracy and destabilizing the nation,” the CDHR said in a statement signed by its president, Debo Adeniran.
CDHR argued that Babangida’s admission is “a clear acknowledgment of his direct involvement in an act that plunged Nigeria into years of political turmoil, civil unrest, and economic hardship.”
The group insisted that the former leader’s actions meet the threshold of crimes against humanity and warrant prosecution.
The rights organisation urged President Bola Tinubu to take immediate steps to hold Babangida accountable, noting that his confession constitutes sufficient evidence for legal action.
“Conveniently, Babangida, a committed record-keeper, could not produce any contemporaneous records, minutes, notes or other evidence to corroborate any of the serious claims and allegations he makes about these dead men and women”
“We call on President Tinubu to prosecute General Babangida for crimes against humanity and for orchestrating a coup d’état that subverted the democratic will of Nigerians,” the statement read.
CDHR further demanded that posthumous recognition be given to Abiola as a past Nigerian president, alongside penalties for all individuals who benefited from the annulment.
The group also urged international human rights bodies to intervene to ensure justice is served.
Babangida’s book filled with allegations against the dead – Odinkalu
A lawyer and former chairman of the National Human Rights Commission, Chidi Odinkalu, criticised Babangida for making claims against individuals who can no longer defend themselves.
Reacting to the autobiography on X, Odinkalu said, “Ibrahim Babangida’s book is filled with allegations against dead men and women. He waited until they were all dead and none of them could controvert him and he portrays himself as a victim of all these dead men and women. This damns him even more than he already was as lacking in character.”
He questioned how someone “so devoid of character and values” was able to rise through the military ranks and wield such influence over Nigeria’s governance.
“Conveniently, Babangida, a committed record-keeper, could not produce any contemporaneous records, minutes, notes or other evidence to corroborate any of the serious claims and allegations he makes about these dead men and women. All hail the Grand Commander of the Order of Cowardice!” he added.
Atedo Peterside dismisses Babangida’s confession
In the same vein, the founder of Stanbic IBTC and president of Anap Foundation, Atedo Peterside, dismissed Babangida’s admission as insignificant.
“IBB admitting, in 2025, that MKO Abiola won the June 12 Presidential elections in 1993, is as significant as him admitting that night follows the day. Are we supposed to clap because he told the truth after 3 decades? Am I missing something?” he posted on X.
UK-based Nigerian lecturer faults elite for applauding Babangida
At the book launch, attended by prominent figures from Nigeria and beyond, Babangida received praise for finally acknowledging his role in the annulment. Over N17 billion was reportedly raised, with contributions from wealthy Nigerians, including Aliko Dangote, to fund the autobiography and the IBB Presidential Library.
A politics lecturer at the University of York, Remi Adekoya, criticised the elite for applauding Babangida.
Reacting on X, Adekoya said, “A man announces he annulled a valid election, triggered a national crisis in which countless died and paved the way for Abacha to torture Nigerians for 5 years. And people are clapping for him, like ‘Thank you Sir.’”
He went further to highlight what he termed the underlying ideology of Nigeria’s elite class.
“There’s a deeper lesson on display at this gathering- that of what exactly constitutes ‘elite ideology’ in Nigeria… It is elitism as an ideology in itself.”
According to him, regardless of ethnicity, religion, or background, the Nigerian elite prioritise maintaining their status above all else.
God does not sleep – Gumsu Sani Abacha
A daughter of the late General Sani Abacha, Gumsu Sani Abacha, responded cryptically to Babangida’s claims about her father’s role in the annulment.
Reacting on X, she posted in Hausa: “Allah baya bacci fa!! Muyi hattara da duniya wallahi” (God does not sleep. We should be careful with this world, I swear).
In another post, she simply wrote “Weakling,” followed by another where she posted her father’s name, “ABACHA.”
My father was a victim of envy, deceit — Abacha’s son
Also, in a subtle reaction to the allegations made against his late father, one of Abacha’s sons, Sadiq, has said his father was a victim of envy and that those trying to portray him as a bad leader had aspired to be like him.
This is just as Babangida said he was not afraid of retiring the late Abacha from the army but was only concerned for his safety and that of those close to him.
In a short message on Facebook, Abacha’s son praised his late father, describing him as a leader whose legacy remains strong despite continued criticism.
He said those trying to portray his late father as a bad leader “had aspired to be like him in their later life career,” adding that his late father was the subject of envy “but history would judge him as a better leader.”
“The man Abacha—you have always been the one they envied with silent deceit.
History shall remember you for being a better leader, no matter how much they try to put you down. As a son, I am most proud of you today. You indeed are the man they wish they were half of,” Sadiq wrote.
He concluded with the Hausa proverb, “Duk wanda yayi jifa a kasuwa,” meaning, “whoever throws a stone in the market…”
Abacha was the Chief of Defence Staff who seized power less than three months after Babangida “stepped aside”.
In the book, Babangida blamed forces led by the late Abacha for the annulment of the June 12, 1993 presidential election.
Though Babangida claimed he uncovered plots by Abacha to violently overthrow his administration, he left him in the military when he “stepped aside” on August 27, 1993.
Many people felt the decision was either taken out of cowardice or a deliberate plan for Abacha to succeed him.
But speaking on handling Abacha and the fallout of the June 12 election, Babangida on pages 282 and 293 of his book, wrote: “Other fundamental questions have arisen in my handling of General Abacha and the June 12 elections. If, as I said earlier, Abacha was a clog in the wheel of the transition to civil rule process and had plotted to remove me as President violently, why didn’t we retire him to forestall the problems that later emerged?
“Was there a pact between Abacha and me that he would succeed me? Was I afraid of him, fearful for my life? Why didn’t we ‘neutralise’ the other known opposition forces to the transition process?
“Why didn’t we take prompt action against the ABN for interfering with the Transition process, in violation of Decree 19, which made it a criminal offence to hinder the transition?
“The answers to some of these questions are implicit in earlier sections of this chapter. No, there was no pact between Abacha and me.
“Yes, there were moments when my safety and the safety of all those dear to me were of concern. But the situation was so unstable that any wrong move on my part could have resulted in bloodletting.
“As I stated above, the military was so factionalised that any move against General Abacha at that time would have, to put it mildly, been problematic. So, I kept hoping (again, naively, it seems now, in retrospect) that Abacha would fall in line and back the transition process.
“I was unsure whether Abacha had the political and general wisdom to navigate Nigeria’s treacherous landscape. I was also not sure that Nigerians could stomach Abacha’s shortcomings. It was best to wait and see while keeping my peace. The rest is now history.”