From Noah Ebije, Kaduna
Secretary General of Arewa Consultative Forum (ACF), Mr. Anthony Sani, in this exclusive interview, said he saw no difference between elections of June 12 and the one which ushered in a democratic government in 1999.
This, according to him, was because both were adjudged free and fair, adding that democratic government actually came into being on May 29, 1999.
He pointed out that the person voted, was voted for on the basis of appeasement to the Yoruba race, and he ruled for two terms of eight years, following June 12 debacle.
The ACF Scribe also explained why the report of the 2014 national conference organized by the then President Goodluck Jonathan, cannot be implemented by the Buhari’s administration, saying that nobody could compel the sitting government to implement reforms outside its mandate because the report of the conference might not be part of the party’s manifesto.
On June 12, 1993, a general election which was acclaimed by Nigerians and even international communities as the freest, most credible and fairest was truncated by the military, and the acclaimed winner of that election, Chief Moshood Abiola was clamped into detention and later died. What lessons are therein for Nigeria to learn 24 years after that incident?
One of the lessons to be learnt from the annulment of the elections of June 12, 1993 is that a mandate freely given by a people should not be truncated by any group no matter how highly placed. I say this because despite knowing the fact that it was not the North which annulled the elections but a military junta and the fact that President Olusegun Obasanjo was voted in order to appease the Yoruba for the annulment, the discord the annulment caused has refused to ebb, hence, the mistrust and suspicion in the polity.
Some people still use the annulment to accuse the North very unfairly of regarding the power to rule this country as its patrimony or its heirloom. To such people, the North sees Nigeria as its lair and northerners are the lords of the Manor. I say very unfairly precisely because leadership of this country has not been exclusive preserve of the North either in thought or practice. For example, of the 17 years of the current democracy, the South has ruled for about 13 years. But we all know the mistrust and suspicions in the polity might have been avoided had June 12 not been annulled.
The lessons are therefore there for Nigerians to learn that sanctity of elections be sustained, and that nobody has the right to annul the elections. I am sure those who annulled the elections have also learnt some useful lessons.
Some Nigerians are saying June 12 is supposed to be declared Democracy day, are you of the same view, and do you think the day is worth celebrating?
I do not see the difference between elections of June 12, 1993 and that of elections which ushered in a democratic government in 1999.This is because both were adjudged free and fair. What is more, democratic government actually took over on May 29, 1999 and the person voted, was voted on the basis of appeasement to the Yoruba, and he also ruled for two terms of eight years allowable by the constitution. So when people still try to make issue out of June 12 that it is more appropriate as Democracy Day, I do not see the wisdom beyond the needless desire to heat up the polity. We need not dwell unduly on former things but should look forward.
Some Nigerians were of the opinion that if Abiola were a northerner, the north would have stood firmly behind him and brought him out of prison by mounting pressure on the military. What is your reaction to this?
It is most unfair, if not wicked, for anybody to begin to guess what would have happened were the winner a northerner who was in prison. How do you make an issue out of guesses? Have you seen northerners demanding for the release of their people who are detained whether for political or criminal reasons? Only the South clamours for such releases.
It was on record that only NADECCO as well as AFENIFERE that actually fought for Abiola at the time. What did ACF do at that time to sympathise or support him?
ACF was not in existence during the June 12 saga. So, nobody can reasonably guess the forum’s reactions were it in existence at the time of June 12, 1993. So since it did not exist, we cannot guess the reactions by the forum.
Recently the Chief of Army staff said some soldiers were meeting secretly with some influential politicians to topple Buhari’s government. Do you think coup is still possible in Nigeria of today?
Even if coup is possible in Nigeria, it is out of fashion. Let democracy be and Nigerians would learn and improve its practices as we go along. No need for any coup now.
There is this general feeling among Nigerians that June 12 incident actually slowed down progress of democracy in Nigeria. What is your take on this?
Since June 12 truncated democracy and prolonged military rule, it stands to reason to submit that the annulment held back the pace of democratic development in Nigeria. There is no doubt about that.
There is this allegation that ACF is divided along ethnic and political lines, with some of its members still loyal to former President Goodluck Jonathan, and not actually comfortable with President Buhari’s leadership style. What are you doing as the Secretary General of the Forum to ensure this division is addressed?
ACF comprises all northerners who are from 18 years irrespective of ethnicity and partisan lines. For anybody to regard such as divisions is lack of appreciation of what ACF is all about. ACF is never partisan but political on issues most northerners share. Of course, there are some people who do not belong to ACF. But that is their right. Majority of northerners agree with ACF and what the forum stands for, to wit, unite the North in the context of one united Nigeria. Make no mistake to imagine that ACF expect the North to be one party. That is not what ACF stands for.
Northern delegates in the last confab have been depicted as opportunists for disowning the report of the confab. As the spokesman for Northern delegates at the confab, what is your take?
I believe such people are getting the position of Northern delegates wrong. Let me explain. The Northern delegates are neither disowning the conference nor its report, but are opposed to the implementations as canvassed. That is to say, Northern delegates believe it is undemocratic for an elected government to implement far reaching Reforms of the polity based on recommendations by a conference of unelected delegates, more so that the APC government did not participate in the confab. Why should the sitting government be compelled to introduce far reaching Reforms outside its mandate as contained in its manifesto? This is because the reports of the conference may not be part of the party’s manifesto.
Northern delegates attended the conference because some sections of the country compelled the sitting government to convoke it, since it is better to jaw-jaw than to fight.
The conference provided a platform where some important people across the nation came together and discussed some real issues of real concern to real ordinary Nigerians. These issues have been brought into the open and cannot easily be forgotten or ignored. What remains is for political parties to study the reports, pick those recommendations agreeable to them and include in their manifesto and use the manifesto to canvass for electoral mandate needed for implementation.
That is how democracy works. It is therefore morally preposterous to expect an elected government to undertake far reaching Reforms of the polity based on recommendations by a conference of unelected delegates. Northern delegates are not so much concerned about the legality of the conference as to its legitimacy.