By Jemimah Wellington, JKNewsMedia Correspondent
THE PRESIDENCY has firmly dismissed claims that President Bola Tinubu supported the annulment of the June 12, 1993, presidential election.
Countering allegations by former Jigawa State Governor Alhaji Sule Lamido, the Presidency described the claims as false, revisionist, and a deliberate distortion of historical facts in a statement issued by Bayo Onanuga, Special Adviser to the President on Information & Strategy at the weekend.
Lamido, speaking on live television, alleged that Tinubu only rose to prominence after the formation of the National Democratic Coalition (NADECO) and accused his late mother, Alhaja Abibatu Mogaji, of mobilising market women in support of the annulment.
Flatly, the Presidency denied the claims, stating that the late Mogaji would have lost her leadership of market women in Lagos had she taken such a position.
It was explained that while she once maintained a personal rapport with then President Ibrahim Babangida, it was long before the annulment crisis unfolded.
Addressing the sequence of events, the Presidency’s statement highlighted Lamido’s tenure as Secretary of the Social Democratic Party (SDP), the platform on which the late presidential candidate, Moshood Kashimawo Abiola (M.K.O) had contested and won the June 12 election.
The Presidency then criticised the SDP leadership, including Lamido and then chairman Chief Tony Anenih, for allegedly surrendering the popular mandate without resistance.
According to the statement, the party’s leadership capitulated to military pressure and collaborated with the defeated National Republican Convention (NRC) to deny Abiola his rightful mandate.
In contrast, it emphasised Senator Bola Tinubu’s vocal opposition to the annulment during his time in the National Assembly.
As early as August 1993, before General Sani Abacha dissolved democratic structures, Tinubu had condemned the annulment on the Senate floor, labelling it a coup against the will of the people.
Tinubu then also described the political turmoil as a self-inflicted crisis resulting from the cancellation of the election and decried the violation of legal and constitutional order.
Following the military coup that ousted the Interim National Government on 17 November 1993, Tinubu, along with fellow senators, resisted the regime.
Then, they were arrested, detained at Alagbon, and prosecuted on fabricated charges.
Despite his detention, Tinubu reportedly continued to support pro-June 12 activism, even funding demonstrations such as the blockade of the Third Mainland Bridge.
The statement also traced Tinubu’s pro-democracy journey through exile after the formation of NADECO in 1994.
The coalition campaigned for the military to relinquish power to MKO Abiola, the winner of the annulled election.
Tinubu was linked to significant financial and strategic support for both NADECO and the Wole Soyinka-led NALICON movement during this period.
The Presidency challenged Lamido’s narrative as contradictory, especially given his admission that Tinubu played a major role in NADECO.
It asserted that Lamido, now aligned with what it termed the “Coalition of the Disgruntled,” is attempting to revise history for political ends.
The statement warned that revisionism only undermines national truth and unity.
Ose Anenih Reacts
Sharpening the exchanges, Ose Anenih, son of the late Chief Tony Anenih, issued a pointed response to the Presidency’s narrative.
He accused Bayo Onanuga, Special Adviser to the President on Information and Strategy, of historical misrepresentation and unfounded allegations against his father.
According to Ose, Chief Abiola himself visited Anenih after returning from exile, only to be rebuked by the then SDP Chairman for allegedly abandoning the party during the most critical phase of the struggle.
Anenih recounted how the SDP and NRC had both engaged with military authorities to broker the Interim National Government with the understanding that it would eventually hand over power to Abiola.
He claimed Abiola endorsed this plan but grew impatient, later favouring Abacha’s takeover—comparing Abacha’s coup to a quicker route to power.
Ose Anenih insisted his father had no personal animosity toward Tinubu and acknowledged Tinubu’s early opposition to the annulment.
He, however, queried the suggestion that Abiola’s swift alignment with Abacha was a commendable action.
He further argued that the public deserves a truthful historical record, given that many key actors in the June 12 saga remain alive and capable of testifying to the events.
