The Nigerian Presidency has issued a forceful rebuttal to claims made by former Jigawa State Governor Alhaji Sule Lamido regarding President Bola Tinubu’s stance on the controversial June 12, 1993, presidential election annulment.
In a detailed statement released by Bayo Onanuga, Special Adviser to the President on Information and Strategy, the Presidency accused Lamido of “distortion of history and a regrettable attempt at revisionism” following his recent television appearance.
The controversy stems from Lamido’s claims that President Tinubu supported the annulment of the election won by MKO Abiola and that Tinubu’s mother, Alhaja Abibatu Mogaji, mobilized market women to back the annulment.
“Alhaji Lamido’s claims represent a distortion of history,” Onanuga stated. “He alleged that President Tinubu only rose to prominence after the formation of NADECO and claimed that Tinubu’s mother, Alhaja Abibatu Mogaji, mobilised market women to back the annulment. These allegations are patently false.”
The Presidency emphasized that Mogaji “never mobilised market women to support the unjust annulment” and noted that “had she done so, she would have lost her position as market leader in Lagos.”
In a sharp counter-attack, the Presidency accused Lamido himself of failing to oppose the military’s actions during the crisis. As secretary of the Social Democratic Party (SDP), whose candidate Abiola won the election, Lamido was criticized for his leadership’s response.
“The SDP leadership, including Lamido and chairman Tony Anenih, wrote their names in the book of infamy by surrendering the people’s mandate without resistance,” the statement read. “To their eternal shame, Lamido and Anenih teamed up with the defeated National Republican Convention to deny Abiola his mandate.”
The Presidency provided detailed evidence of Tinubu’s opposition to the annulment, citing his August 19, 1993, Senate speech where he condemned the decision.
According to the records quoted in the statement, Senator Tinubu declared: “We have a situation that suggests that the annulment of the June 12 election is another coup d’etat. My question is, when are we going to stop tolerating injustices, coup d’etat, and abuse by the people on whom we invested so many resources—the public funds of this country?”
He continued: “This is a self-inflicted crisis because, without the abortion or annulment of the June 12 election, there would be no crisis like this. We have a government that made the law and abused its law.”
The statement outlined Tinubu’s involvement in the pro-democracy struggle, including his participation in NADECO (National Democratic Coalition), formed on May 15, 1994, and his subsequent five-year exile.
“While Tinubu was away, agents of the junta bombed his home in Balarabe Muse Crescent, Victoria Island,” the Presidency noted, highlighting the personal cost of his opposition to military rule.
The statement also credited Tinubu with funding pro-June 12 protests and supporting Professor Wole Soyinka’s NALICON organization during the struggle for democracy.
The Presidency suggested that Lamido’s comments were politically motivated, describing him as “a member of the Coalition of the Disgruntled” and accusing him of attempting to rewrite history for political reasons.
“We do not want to believe that Alhaji Lamido suffers from what psychologists call tall poppy syndrome,” Onanuga stated. “However, the conclusion is inevitable as it appears that Lamido is envious of Tinubu’s democratic credentials.”
The statement concluded with a firm defence of the President’s democratic record: “The facts remain clear: President Tinubu was—and remains—a steadfast advocate for democracy, in contrast to the record of Lamido and others who capitulated in the face of military oppression and intimidation.”
The dispute highlights ongoing tensions over the interpretation of Nigeria’s democratic transition period and the roles played by current political leaders during the military era.
