Every June 12, Nigeria observes a significant date that embodies both the aspirations for democracy and the painful betrayal of that dream. This day commemorates the 1993 presidential election, celebrated as the most free and fair in the country’s history but ultimately annulled by the military regime led by General Ibrahim Babangida.

While the focus has often been on the political and military figures involved, there has been less emphasis on the intellectual shortcomings that contributed to this democratic failure.

These shortcomings—the “intellectual sins” of June 12—include silence, complicity, and ideological failures that continue to impact Nigeria’s pursuit of democracy.

The Election That Could Have Changed Everything:

On June 12, 1993, Nigerians came together to vote for Chief Moshood Kashimawo Olawale (MKO) Abiola, a well-known southern Muslim celebrated for his wealth, philanthropy, and political acumen. His electoral victory was more than just a tally of votes; it became a powerful symbol of national unity and a collective longing for civilian governance following years of military rule.

The military’s annulment of the election results, based on vague security concerns and claims of irregularities, was profoundly disappointing. This decision was not merely a political manoeuvre; it represented a significant betrayal of the democratic values that the election was meant to uphold.

The Silence of the Intellectual Class:

One of the most troubling aspects of the June 12 crisis was the widespread silence—or, even worse, the rationalizations—by many in Nigeria’s intellectual elite. University professors, public commentators, and thought leaders, who should have served as the nation’s moral compass, largely failed to speak out against the annulment. Some even justified it, wrapping their arguments in legal jargon or appealing to national stability.

The silence in this situation was not neutral; it was an act of complicity. During times of national crisis, when the intelligentsia chooses to remain silent, this absence is not merely a lack of comment—it is an endorsement of the status quo. Nigeria’s intellectual class’s failure to provide a strong defence of democracy in 1993 highlighted a more profound issue: a lack of genuine commitment to democratic governance.

Ethnic Chauvinism and the Failure of National Integration:

The annulment highlighted the fragility of Nigeria’s national identity. Although Abiola had widespread appeal across the country, the decision to invalidate his victory was perceived mainly as influenced by northern political elites who were uneasy about a southern Muslim becoming president. This perception, whether accurate or not, strengthened the belief that Nigeria’s democracy is held captive by ethnic and regional interests.

Once again, the intellectual class fell short. Instead of confronting the ethnicization of politics, many scholars and commentators either overlooked it or contributed to it. The chance to use June 12 as a catalyst for national integration and civic nationalism was missed.

The Legal and Constitutional Vacuum:

The events of June 12 highlighted Nigeria’s fragile legal and constitutional framework. The annulment of the election exposed the country’s institutions as inadequate in preventing executive overreach and safeguarding the electoral process. At that time, there was a lack of an independent judiciary capable of contesting military actions, an ineffective legislature to oversee government activities, and a civil society that was not sufficiently strong to mobilize in response.

The Institutional weakness in Nigeria was not a coincidence; it stemmed from years of intellectual neglect. The country’s legal scholars, constitutional designers, and policy thinkers did not create a system robust enough to resist authoritarian tendencies. Consequently, the annulment of electoral processes directly resulted from this inadequacy.

The Myth of Transition Without Transformation:

The military’s commitment to transitioning Nigeria to civilian rule was fraught with inconsistencies. The annulment of the June 12 elections exposed the illusion that democratic governance could be realised without a fundamental change in the country’s political culture. The transition program itself was characterized by a top-down approach, a lack of transparency, and a focus on maintaining the interests of the elite.

Many intellectuals were drawn into the myth surrounding a purportedly democratic transition process. By actively participating in advisory roles, they inadvertently lent credibility to a system that lacked true democratic principles. Their failure to critically examine the underlying foundations of this transition program represents a significant intellectual oversight.

The Repetition of History:

The aftermath of June 12 has had lasting repercussions for Nigeria, as the country seems trapped in a cycle of repeating past mistakes. Key issues such as electoral malpractice, the dominance of elites over democratic institutions, and the suppression of dissent are still prevalent in the political landscape. Unfortunately, society has not fully grasped or embraced the vital lessons from June 12, indicating a failure to learn from history.

The recurring failures In Nigeria’s democracy highlight a deeper intellectual shortcoming, as there is a reluctance to engage in critical self-reflection and necessary institutional reform. It is simpler for leaders to honour June 12 through ceremonies and speeches rather than address the uncomfortable realities that emerge from this historical moment.

A Path to Redemption:

Nigeria needs to initiate a new democratic renaissance to address the intellectual shortcomings highlighted on June 12. This revival should focus on enhancing civic education, implementing institutional reforms, and reaffirming a strong commitment to democratic values.

1. Enhancing civic education within society is essential to ensuring the vitality of democracy. This involves prioritizing the teaching of democratic principles, critical thinking, and active citizenship in schools, universities, and media outlets. By doing so, citizens will become more aware of their rights and responsibilities, thus fostering a more engaged and informed populace.

2. Strengthen Institutions: A functioning democracy requires that the judiciary, electoral commission, and legislature operate without political interference. Achieving this necessitates legal reforms and a significant cultural shift in how power is exercised and contested within society.

3. Empower a New Generation of Public Intellectuals: Nigeria requires independent thinkers who prioritize democratic values over ethnic or political affiliations. These intellectuals should courageously challenge authority and advocate for democratic principles, unafraid of potential repercussions.

4. Confront the Past Honestly: The June 12 crisis serves as an important historical event that should be incorporated into school curricula and discussed in public forums. It carries significant moral lessons that are essential for understanding the past. By acknowledging and confronting this history, Nigeria can work towards establishing a more just and democratic future.

Conclusion: Democracy as a Moral Imperative

June 12 serves as a powerful reminder of Nigeria’s complex democratic journey, highlighting both its potential and challenges. Rather than merely marking the date with hollow statements, engaging in a genuine reflection on the past is essential. The mistakes of that time—characterized by silence, complicity, and ideological failures—should not be repeated. As we honour this day, we must recommit ourselves to the ideals embodied by Abiola’s victory, including justice, unity, and the empowerment of the people.

Democracy transcends being merely a system of governance; it is fundamentally a moral obligation. Every citizen, particularly those influential in shaping public opinion, has the responsibility to uphold and defend democratic principles with bravery, clarity, and firm conviction.

In a clear bid to stem the tide of crisis rocking the Peoples Democratic Party, PDP, the PDP Special Reconciliation Committee chaired by former President of the Senate, Dr. Bukola Saraki, Friday, met with the governor of Enugu State and leader of the party in the South East region, Dr. Peter Mbah.

Other members of the Committee present at the meeting, which held behind closed doors at the Government House, Enugu, were former governor of Bayelsa State, Senator Seriake Dickson, and former governor of Gombe State, Dr. Ibrahim Dankwambo.

It is recalled that the leaders of PDP in the zone had in a communique issued after the South East PDP Zonal Executive Council, ZEC, meeting a fortnight ago announced the re-nomination of former PDP National Youth Leader, Hon. Sunday Udeh-Okoye, to serve out the remaining tenure of the National Secretary, threatening possible exodus should their decision not be respected.

“In the event that our position is not promptly implemented by the Party, the South East PDP, as a family, will be compelled to reconsider our relationship with the PDP going forward,” the communique stated.

But addressing newsmen after the closed-door meeting with Mbah, Saraki said, “We are members of the PDP Reconciliation and Strategy Committee that was set up recently by the PDP Governors’ Forum to work towards ensuring that our upcoming National Executive Council meeting and also likely convention is rancor-free and and works smoothly.

“In line with that, we are here in Enugu State to consult with one of our leaders, Governor Peter Mbah, who is the leader of South East PDP.

“This is the first state we are coming to because we appreciate the importance of the South East in our PDP family. As you all know, the South East has played a key role as the bedrock of the popularity and the strength of our party.

“In recognition of that, we are here to consult with him and first to commend him on the leadership role he has been playing in the party. More importantly also, to commend what he is doing in Enugu State, which is a reflection for Nigerians to see what happens when you have a PDP government.

“In doing that, we discussed how we will ensure that we carry out the assignment given to us and go ahead to have our NEC and our convention. We will have one that is rancor-free and smooth, peaceful and lays the foundation for the PDP that we all are wishing for.

“We have had a very good discussion. Frankly, we have had a very, very useful discussion. We are going away with some of the suggestions that we have here and hopefully work on that.

“With this, we can say here in Enugu we laid the foundation for a greater new PDP that is coming.

“What we have also seen today is that there is nothing insurmountable in the challenge ahead and the spirit, the commitment of all of us, especially our leaders, is very very inspiring,” he stated.

… It’s time to stand together – Mbah

… We’ve been trampled upon – Wabara

… We don’t want to be taken for granted – Achike Udenwa

The crisis currently rocking the opposition Peoples Democratic Party, PDP, has worsened as the South East caucus of the party has threatened mass exit from the troubled party if its choice of Hon. Udeh-Okoye as the National Secretary is not respected for the umpteenth time.

This was even as the governor of Enugu State and leader of the PDP in the zone, Dr. Peter Mbah, said it was time for the zone to speak with one voice, while the Chairman of PDP Board of Trustees, Senator Adolphus Wabara, and former governor of Imo State, Chief Achike Udenwa, expressed fury over what they described as the party’s disrespecting and trampling of the region.

The zone vented its displeasure in a communique read by the Zonal Chairman, Chief Ali Odefa, at the end of a meeting by the South East Zonal Executive, ZEC, at the Government House, Enugu on Wednesday.

It said the meeting was convened to nominate a candidate to complete the remaining term of the position of National Secretary in line with the directive of the party’s National Working Committee, NWC, during its 600th meeting in Abuja.

Rendering the communique, Odefa said, “The South East ZEC exhaustively deliberated on the directive of the NWC and came to the conclusion that it offered a sure pathway to peace, unity, stability, and progress of our party. Consequently, the ZEC unanimously recommended Hon. Sunday Udeh-Okoye as the candidate to complete the term of office of the National Secretary.”

The South East PDP, however regretted that it had to go through the process of nominating Udeh-Okoye severally since October 2023, and urged the NWC to not only immediately ratify his nomination, but also ensure that Arch. Setonji Koshoedo effectively occupies the Office of the National Secretary in acting capacity pending Udeh-Okoye’s ratification by the NEC.

The South East PDP, however, threatened to review its continued membership of the party should its position suffer further delay despite its agelong loyalty to the PDP.

“The South East has consistently served as a stronghold of the PDP from inception. In PDP’s near three-decade existence, we have given our loyalty and all to the party.

“Currently, while the party has been losing key members post-2023 general elections, the South East PDP is at the vanguard of strengthening the Party by rallying major opposition figures such as in Enugu where the Labour Party, LP, gubernatorial candidate, two LP House of Representatives Members, numerous members of the House of Assembly, among other stalwarts into the PDP fold.

“Therefore, we hope that this time around, the position of the South East PDP regarding the Office of the National Secretary is accorded the honour and immediacy it deserves. This would bring to a closure to the needless lingering dispute over the matter.

“However, in the event that our position is not promptly implemented by the Party, the South East PDP, as a family, will be compelled to reconsider our relationship with the PDP going forward,” the communique concluded.

Wabara, on his part, said it was in order to review the region’s relationship with the party should what he described as trampling of the zone by the party persist.

“We have been trampled upon, not taken seriously. If such a position were vacant in the South-South, it would not be like this. And now, it came to us. I mean, the usual thing is to play politics with the Igbo man. Yes, we may have to reconsider our stand as far as the party is concerned. But I trust the NWC,” he stated.

Udenwa, on his part, Udenwa said, “We are expecting that this issue will be finally ironed out once and for all. We do not want to be taken for granted by anybody again.”