In a dramatic twist to Nigeria’s enduring June 12 narrative, the Special Adviser to the President on Information and Strategy, Bayo Onanuga, issued a withering rebuke of former Jigawa State Governor Sule Lamido’s recent on‐air assertions.
During an appearance on Arise Television, Lamido had accused President Bola Ahmed Tinubu of being “a major supporter” of General Ibrahim Babangida’s decision to annul the June 12, 1993, presidential election.
The Presidency immediately labelled these allegations “revisionist” and “a blatant distortion of Nigeria’s democratic history,” signalling its readiness to contest any attempt to rewrite the record.
The Unmatched Legacy of June 12
The June 12, 1993, poll remains the most celebrated—and most grievously betrayed—election in Nigerian history. Unofficial results showed Moshood Kashimawo Olawale Abiola of the Social Democratic Party (SDP) securing 8,341,309 votes (58.36 %) to Bashir Tofa’s 5,952,087 (41.64 %).
Observers hailed the process as free, fair and peaceful, with over 14 million Nigerians casting ballots. Yet, on 23 June 1993, Babangida annulled the outcome, plunging the nation into a constitutional crisis.
Lamido’s Controversial Claims
Speaking on 21 June 2025, Lamido alleged that Tinubu, then an SDP senator, “threw his weight” behind Babangida’s annulment and that Tinubu’s mother, Alhaja Abibatu Mogaji, mobilised market women in support of the coup.
Such remarks, the Presidency argued, are not only baseless but ignore the fact that Alhaja Mogaji would have instantly forfeited her standing as Lagos market leader had she backed any pro‐annulment movement.
Lamido’s Own Record Under Scrutiny
Onanuga’s statement turned the spotlight back onto Lamido’s wartime record. As SDP Secretary, Lamido and party chairman Tony Anenih bore responsibility for the SDP leadership’s failure to mobilise against Babangida’s overreach.
According to the statement, they “wrote their names in the book of infamy” by acquiescing to military pressure rather than championing the people’s mandate.
Tinubu’s Senate Outcry: August 19, 1993
Contrary to Lamido’s portrayal, Senator Tinubu used his Senate platform to condemn the annulment as “another coup d’état,” urging Nigerians to reject “injustice and lawlessness.”
On 19 August 1993, Tinubu declared on the Senate floor:
“We have a situation that suggests that the abortion of the June 12 election is another coup d’état…When are we going to stop tolerating injustices…? This is a self-inflicted crisis because, without the annulment of the June 12 election, there would be no crisis like this.”
These remarks, captured in the National Assembly records, directly refute Lamido’s assertion that Tinubu supported the annulment.
From Senate to Streets: Tinubu’s Early Resistance
After General Sani Abacha dissolved all democratic institutions on 17 November 1993, Tinubu and several senators reconvened in Lagos, refusing to recognise military rule.
Arrested and detained at Alagbon Police Station, Tinubu continued to bankroll pro-June 12 protests, including the blockade of the Third Mainland Bridge, even as threats mounted against his life.
The Birth of NADECO: May 15, 1994
In response to Abacha’s brutal clampdown, a consortium of pro-democracy advocates christened the National Democratic Coalition (NADECO) on 15 May 1994, calling for the restoration of civilian rule and recognition of Abiola’s mandate.
Tinubu emerged as a founding member, tirelessly mobilising resources and coordinating activities both in Nigeria and in exile.
Exile and International Advocacy
Following a military raid on his Lagos residence, Tinubu fled into exile, where he continued the struggle alongside Abiola and other NADECO stalwarts.
From London and elsewhere, Tinubu’s fundraising and diplomatic overtures kept international attention fixed on Nigeria’s democratic plight, even as Lamido and others were rumoured to be negotiating discreetly with the junta.
Lamido’s Belated Admission—and Strategic Downplay
Curiously, Lamido later conceded that Tinubu did play a role in NADECO, yet sought to minimise its significance.
The Presidency’s rejoinder accused him of “confusion” over NADECO’s genesis and scope, underscoring that the coalition was the linchpin of the June 12 struggle—channeling protests, galvanising civil society and sustaining media attention.
The Politics of Revisionism
This spat is emblematic of a deeper contest over Nigeria’s historical memory. By branding Lamido’s narrative as “tall poppy syndrome,” the Presidency implied that jealousy—not truth—motivates these claims.
In the cut-and-thrust of Nigeria’s political arena, the ability to shape collective memory can confer immense leverage.
Statistical Stakes and Symbolic Dates
June 12’s statistical legacy is stark: Abiola’s undisputed victory in 19 states and the FCT, with a nationwide turnout exceeding 35 % despite judicial injunctions.
The annulment sparked sustained labour strikes, civil unrest and international condemnation—events which Lamido’s revisionism risks obscuring.
Implications for Contemporary Politics
As Nigeria navigates its Fourth Republic, control over June 12’s narrative has direct political currency. Tinubu’s presidency, inaugurated on 29 May 2023, derives its democratic legitimacy in part from his June 12 pedigree, now celebrated annually as Democracy Day.
Lamido’s challenge thus transcends personal animus—it probes the very foundation of Tinubu’s moral authority.
Truth as National Imperative
The Presidency’s forceful rebuttal of Lamido is more than a rebuttal—it is a call to safeguard Nigeria’s democratic heritage.
By insisting on documentary evidence, eyewitness accounts and verifiable dates, the statement reaffirms that history must not be subject to the whims of political convenience.
In the words of Onanuga, “revisionism does not serve the cause of truth or our nation’s interests”.
