If General Obasanjo, why not General Buhari?
By Duro Onabule[onabule@sunnewsonline.com]
If I were the average Nigerian, (without being immodest) I would not be writing
today in stout defence of General Muhammadu Buhari, former head of state, who
is under seemingly well-co-ordinated criticisms for no other reason than exercising
his constitutional and political right of seeking elective public office. The
major charge against General Buhari is that during his tenure, he violated human
rights.
Well, I was a victim of that charge because I was detained more than ten times
usually over week-ends from Friday till Monday or Tuesday. My longest detention
was for a fortnight for criticisms in my column in the defunct National Concord
or for critical editorials of the paper which mostly I did not even write but
had to take the responsibility as the editor. My experiences in detention at
Awolowo Road NSO camp were traumatic and yet educative enough that General Buhari
(or anybody in his position) could never know or approve what was being done
in the name of government. So I never held it against General Buhari.
Military rule anywhere in the world is an emergency which is not a tea party.
Even in a democratic set up and in a supposed civilised society, human rights
are suspended to deal with a prevailing unusual situation. Just two examples.
Following the declaration of emergency in the defunct western region, the administrator,
Dr. Koye Majekodunmi clamped the star performers led by Chief Obafemi Awolowo
and Chief S. L. Akintola into detention disguised as restriction. Also, rather
than tolerate anarchy, the British government sent the feuding Irish (either
as insurgents or belligerents) into long detention without trial and dignified
the apparent violation of human rights as internment, a policy which operated
for many years.
Then, there was this incident which should now be judged on its merit. As the
story went, in the build-up to December 1983 military coup, a certain Major
Bamidele picked up the information and as a loyal officer, promptly reported
to his General Officer Commanding (GOC) Third Division, Major General Muhammadu
Buhari, who, as a precautionary measure, sent the poor officer (Bamidele) into
guard room. When the coup eventually took place, General Buhari emerged head
of state.
It was a renewed era of retirement/dismissals in the armed forces and public
service. Among those listed for retirement if not dismissal was the same Major
Bamidele obviously because of the "stain" of detention on his service
record without knowing or bothering to know the origin of that stain. But General
Buhari owned up as the cause of Major Bamidele’s problem, or at least
that was the implication of General Buhari’s gesture in deleting the officer’s
name from those to be removed from the army. Such courageous and humane gesture
could not have come from a devil General Buhari as he is now being wrongly portrayed
to be.
When therefore I met President Ibrahim Babangida at Dodan Barracks on September
9, 1985 at his request with the offer of being his Chief Press Secretary, one
of my suggestions to IBB on the spot was that nothing should happen to Generals
Buhari and (the late) Tunde Idiagbon, an assurance which I obtained.
Then, eight years ago, the same charges currently being levelled against General
Buhari were similarly levelled against General Olusegun Obasanjo in a desperate
attempt to frustrate his constitutional right of aspiring to the leadership
of this country. But I almost all alone (on the pages of National Concord) defended
Obasanjo. I never foresaw that General Buhari would ever face the same fire.
By the way, the very same people who fiercely opposed Obasanjo eight years ago
are the choir boys around him today.
Hence, close examination of the charges against General Buhari will show that
the man simply took a cue from his military commanders-in-chief and civilian
prime minister. One of such commanders-in-chief was General Obasanjo and if
despite such charges, the same Obasanjo exercised his right under the Constitution
to contest presidential elections in 1999, why should General Buhari not exercise
the same constitutional right to aspire to the Presidency?
By the way, we should stop deceiving ourselves with this "Chief" title
when addressing President Obasanjo. A military general should be proud of his
professional career. Hence, there were General Eisenhower (American), General
De Gaulle (French), General Juan Peron (Argentinian), General Moshe Dayan (Israel),
General Sharon (also Israel) etc. We are therefore discussing Nigerian military
generals who preceded General Buhari as Nigerian leaders.
General Buhari’s strength (some would call it weakness) is his bluntness
which of all people, South West politicians should even appreciate compared
to the trap, if not betrayal, which earned them (South West politicians) the
political massacre of 2003. Buhari said he would tamper with the press.
We (journalists) therefore knew the risk we were taking. Hence I was detained
many times, while Tunde Thompson and Nduka Irabor were jailed with a retroactive
law. But did Buhari or the army introduce retroactive legislation into governance
in Nigeria or was Buhari the first head of state to tamper with the press?
May the late prime minister Tafawa Balewa continue to rest in peace. The Federal
Government in 1964 hurriedly amended the newspaper law stipulating six months
jail for publishing "rumour" even if true, a desperate measure to
curb the guts of the media especially in view of the prolonged tension generated
by the 1962 political crisis in the Action Group/West regional government. ("Even
a minister grumbles," i.e. against corruption), editor of the defunct Sunday
Express, the late Dapo Fatogun, was jailed for six months. Later, editor of
Nigerian Tribune, the late Ayo Ojewunmi, was also jailed for six months.
After the army struck in January 1966, General Aguiyi Ironsi clamped the editor
of defunct DRUM magazine, the late Nelson Ottah, into detention quite rightly,
for publishing a cartoon which further injured the feelings of a section of
the country on the fatal casualties of the January 1966 unsuccessful mutiny.
Neither General Ironsi nor his successor General Yakubu Gowon threatened to
tamper with the press. But Gowon’s regime stopped publication of the Daily
Times group for ten days and clamped Alhaji Babatunde Jose, Chairman/Managing
Director, Henry Odukomaya, editor of Daily Times and some others into detention
without trial. Their offence? Imminent publication of the autopsy report on
the unsolved murder of Chief Medical Adviser, Federal Ministry of Health, Dr
Ademola, younger brother of Nigeria’s then Chief Justice Adetokunbo Ademola.
Dr Ademola’s mysterious murder at his Ikoyi residence was (as usual in
Nigeria) linked to the impending medical report of the cause of the death in
a helicopter crash, of the then Chief of Air Staff, Colonel Alao.
Within his short tenure of six months, the late General Murtala Mohammed also
got university lecturer, the late George Ohombamu arraigned in a Lagos Court
for false publication of his (Murtala Mohammed’s) alleged personal assets.
Then General Obasanjo, as military ruler, tampered with the publication of NEWBREED
magazine.
If all these happened under General Buhari’s former commanders-in-chief
and did not count against General Obasanjo’s return to public office,
why should Buhari be singled out for unfair demolition exercise? What is more,
the situation was not different under Buhari’s military and (supposedly)
civilian successors.
President Babangida’s regime proscribed Newswatch magazine, closed down
the Concord, Punch newspapers. General Abacha’s administration had the
distinction of opening and closing the same Concord newspapers. President Obasanjo’s
civilian regime should therefore have had a better record rather than laughably
querying General Buhari’s claim to democracy. Otherwise, why was AIT transmission
house shut down? Was the station of Freedom Radio in Kano not closed down? Only
lately too were journalists at two Abuja-based publications harrassed by security
operatives.
It was of course wrong of the Buhari administration to have detained ex-President
Shehu Shagari in a house while Vice President Alex Ekwueme was detained at Kirikiri
prison both in Lagos. For the critics, the insinuation of ethnic favour is there.
We must therefore cite a similar situation. Four Nigerians were standing trial
purportedly for treason. Since then, two – Dr Fasehun and Gani Adams –
from President Obasanjo’s south west have regained their freedom or at
least, been released on bail?
Why have the remaining two – Alhaji Asari Dokubo and MASSOB leader Uwazuruike
– from eastern part of the country not regained their freedom or been
released on bail? If there is any evidence implicating these two, what is holding
up their trial? Nobody should be deceived that in Nigeria, bail for such high
profile cases could ever be granted without the knowledge and indeed the approval
of the presidency.
It was also wrong of General Buhari to have suspended two traditional rulers,
Emir Ado Bayero of Kano and Oba Sijuwade of Ile-Ife. What has that got to do
with Buhari’s current aspiration to the presidency? If anything, ordinary
suspension of these two traditional rulers should in fact earn General Buhari
commendation compared to the humiliation to which civilian leaders and military
rulers before and after General Buhari subjected traditional rulers. Better
put, which is milder, suspension or outright deposition? Now, holding such a
charge against General Buhari wrongly created the impression that he was the
first and only leader to have committed what is no more than a cultural deviance.
No such charge was made against Papa Awo in 1979 and 1983 to query his suitability
to contest presidential elections? That was notwithstanding the fact that the
old man’s administration in the defunct western region was the first to
depose a traditional ruler Oba Adeyemi (father of the present) Alaafin of Oyo
in 1954, followed in 1958 with the deposition of Olota of Ota. Northern premier,
the late Ahmadu Bello followed suit by deposing Sir Muhammadu Sanusi as Emir
of Kano in 1957. Premier Dennis Osadebay of the then newly-created Mid-west
region deposed the reigning Oba Erejuwa, Olu of Warri in 1964.
The army was less than a year in ruling Nigeria when the second military governor
of the then western region, Colonel (as he then was) Robert Adebayo deposed
Olowo of Owo, Oba Olateru Olagbegi. That was under the regime of General Gowon.
Return of civilian rule in 1979 was to resume the humiliation of traditional
rulers for political purposes, without realising that the new constitution not
only was supreme but also instantly nullified any other law, state or federal,
which conflicted with the provisions of the constitution. The most notable was
the Chiefs’ Law Cap. 23 which devolved on the component south western
states from the old western region. Hence, in 1981, the late Bisi Onabanjo,
as Ogun State governor purported to have deposed the Awujale of Ijebuland, Oba
Sikiru Adetona under the invalid Chiefs’ Law. Oba Adetona won the epic
long drawn legal war to remain on the throne.
In 1982, the then civilian governor of Kano State, Abubakar Rimi, issued a query
to the same Emir Ado Bayero of Kano which the latter’s loyal subjects
considered an affront to warrant state-wide violent revolt with heavy casualties
among whom was one of the governor’s key political advisers.
Intermittent return of military and civilian administrations did not change
the situation. Under General Buhari’s regime, two traditional rulers mentioned
earlier were suspended for six months each. But under the IBB regime, the then
military governor of the then Gongola State, the late Colonel Yohanna Madaki
deposed the Emir of Muri, gloating in the process that he (the governor) had
dealt a heavy blow to feudalism (his exact words).
General Sani Abacha never saw eye to eye with Sultan Ibrahim Dasuki of Sokoto,
an opportunity which the then Sokoto State military governor, Brigadier-General
Muazu seized to depose the monarch.
The present Obasanjo regime has also recorded its stain in humiliating traditional
rulers with the deposition of Emir Mustapha Jokolo of Gwandu by Governor Aliero
of Kebbi State.
With all these, how justifiable is it to cite General Buhari as being unsuitable
for the presidency, merely for suspending rather than deposing traditional rulers?
Backdating any law is most unfair especially when such decision involves taking
lives. Therefore, on the surface, the charge against General Buhari on the 1984
Drugs Offences Decree may appear to hold. But it depends on the circumstances.
In truth, the man who committed the offence before the decree came into force,
that is when the offence did not carry death penalty should have been sentenced
to jail term, a position which I took in this column (then) in the National
Concord.
However, those who committed the drugs offence after the Decree carrying death
sentence came into force deserve no sympathy. In Cuba, for example, drugs offence
carries death penalty. When therefore the country’s erstwhile defence
minister, General Ochoa, a fellow revolutionary was involved in drug trafficking,
President Castro carried out the death sentence and replaced him with his (Castro’s)
younger brother, who will most likely be the new Cuban president should Castro
leave the scene.
What is more, retroactive legislation was not started by General Buhari nor
by the army. Backdating of laws is as old as the first republic especially the
old western region with the Chiefs’ Law to stabilise the Olubadan succession
tussle between the government’s preferred candidate and his rival supported
by the late Adegoke Adelabu, then uncrowned King of Ibadan politics.
Adegoke Adelabu grabbed the initiative by installing his candidate. Chief Awolowo’s
government was seemingly helpless amidst imminent anarchy and the determination
to install the government candidate. The answer was a Chiefs’ Law making
it a criminal offence punishable by long term imprisonment for anybody to install
a traditional ruler except a candidate approved by the government, or for anybody
to allow himself to be installed a traditional ruler without government’s
approval. The law was backdated to compel both Adelabu and his candidate to
give up the battle.
So, it depends on the circumstances. In that case, for peace and good governance
in the land, the government of western region had to act.
Unfortunately, it turned out to be a dangerous precedent as the Action Group
had to taste the bitter pill in 1963. At the end of emergency rule in western
region in December 1962, Tafawa Balewa’s Federal Government restored the
Akintola regime in the west. This was hotly disputed by his rival, Alhaji D.
S. Adegbenro who headed for the law courts in what turned out to be a vain demand
that emergency rule should be followed by general elections.
From the High Court to the Supreme Court in Lagos, Adegbenro lost the battle.
He then appealed to the Privy Council in London which ruled in his favour that
the end of emergency rule should be followed by general elections.
In reaction, Tafawa Balewa in 1963 as prime minister, rushed through parliament
an amendment to Nigeria’s constitution abolishing appeals to the Privy
Council in London, and backdated the amendment to October 1, 1960. That nullified
Adegbenro’s victory and kept Chief Akintola in power.
Again, circumstances determine some retroactive legislation. In February 1976,
there was no treason offences decree but following the failure of the Dimka
coup and the assassination of General Murtala Mohammed, General Obasanjo had
to promulgate a decree with death sentence for the offence and backdated it.
Those now attempting to crucify General Buhari should go through Allison Ayida’s
response to General Obasanjo’s memoirs, NOT MY WILL. In that response,
the then Secretary to Federal Government narrated how the verdict of the 1976
coup plotters, not only deadlocked members of the Supreme Military Council but
how somebody’s casting vote most unfairly insisted on the execution of
an innocent officer, Colonel Waya.
This shows that in moments of emergency, mistakes are human. To now single out
General Buhari for such a mistake is to fault one and gloss over the other.
Even under President Obasanjo’s regime, there were clear-cut cases arising
from retroactive legislation. And this is despite the fact that the 1999 constitution
part two, section nine completely renders any law with retroactive effect null
and void. Specifically, the EFCC came into force in 2004 but the same agency
has been harassing Nigerians (General Mohammed Marwa, Mohammed Babangida and
Mike Adenuga) for offence suspected to have been committed in 2002 or earlier.
Today, some Nigerians are conveniently accusing General Buhari of violating
rights of politicians in detaining them after the December 1983 coup. Were they
not these same Nigerians who blamed IBB for releasing allegedly corrupt politicians
from detention?
General Buhari is being criticised for not attending meetings of National Council
of States. General Obasanjo returned to public life twenty years after leaving
office as a military ruler. Between 1979 and 1999, how many of such meetings
of National Council of States did he attend under President Shehu Shagari, General
Buhari, General Babangida and General Abacha? And was Obasanjo’s irregular
attendance of Council of States meeting cited against him to stop him from contesting
elections in 1999?
Membership of National Council of States is not only voluntary but also purely
advisory. And when on one occasion, General Buhari attended a meeting of the
National Council of States, it turned out that the gathering was a trap to undermine
adherents of Muslim religion (especially in the north) in their demand for Sharia
Law. While even from the minutes of the said National Council of States meeting
attended by Buhari, published by secretary to the government Ufot Ekaette, (a
Christian) it was clear that Sharia issue was never discussed, Federal Government’s
stand on such a concurrent issue as religion was only announced.
General Buhari therefore had to dissociate himself from a decision purportedly
to suspend the Sharia Law. In the Muslim north, Sharia is an article of faith
and that does not necessarily make General Buhari a Muslim fundamentalist as
being maliciously portrayed. General Obasanjo regularly attends retreats of
Redeemed Christian Church of God and born again groups. Indeed, Obasanjo publicly
canvassed for donations totalling at least six billion naira for the completion
of the Christian Ecumenical Centre in Abuja. Government parastatals like NDDC
donated scores if not hundreds of millions of naira. Does that necessarily make
General Obasanjo a Christian fundamentalist?
Or was that cited against him for 2003 elections? Did General Buhari or any
northern Nigerian ex-head of state collect donations for the construction of
the national mosque in Abuja?
General Buhari had legal and logical reasons not to collect his national honours
when offered by President Obasanjo. It was a trap set for Buhari who was alert
not to fall into such trap. Here was a man challenging in the law courts the
purported but universally acknowledged rigged re-election of President Obasanjo.
For the same man to turn round and collect such apparent Greek gift while the
case was still in court would have meant recognition of Obasanjo’s re-election.
Why then would the same General Buhari continue the election petition? Neither
was it Buhari’s fault that the archaic and lazy Nigerian judicial system
took more than two and half years to determine an election petition.
A most appropriate analogy is for anybody, criticising the daylight brazen robbery
of choice Nigerian national assets into a gangster group called TRANSCORP, to
turn round and buy the shares being baited for Nigerians at home and abroad.
There are still Nigerians with principle.
Military officers never know anything about retroactive laws but civilian lawyers/drafts
men showed them (soldiers) the light.
What is wrong with General Buhari for turning round now to embrace the vibrancy
of Nigerian press? If anything it shows the sincerity, courage and gratitude
of such a man who initially probably misunderstood the role of "Lagos-Ibadan
press axis." But after exposing the widespread rigging of the 2003 presidential
elections which enabled him (Buhari) to challenge the legality of the election,
he could not hold back his appreciation.
General Buhari most probably could also not believe the "nuclear bomb"
employed by the media to destroy the treasonable tenure elongation of the Obasanjo
regime. If General Buhari now senses such patriotism and nationalism as against
the erstwhile malicious label of ethnic axis tagged on the same Nigerian press,
it is only fair to reciprocate his (General Buhari’s) guts in publicly
purging himself.
Finally, there is this political advice especially for south westerners in Action
Congress. They are on the same old path of not making any allowance for any
re-alignment which events may suddenly dictate. In 1959, Nnamdi Azikiwe was
the main target. In the end, he was offered prime ministership to block Tafawa
Balewa from reaping his electoral victory. Zik, a statesman, rejected the offer.
Again in 1979, the same Zik was the target and by the time Shehu Shagari’s
NPN won the senatorial elections, Zik was also baited with an emergency alliance
proposal. It also did not work out.
It can only be hoped that history will not repeat itself.