PMB’s MKO Abiola’s GCFR Award and Nigeria’s New Democracy Day: The Foreign Policy Dimensions
On Wednesday evening, 6th June, 2018, Nigeria’s President,Alhaji Muhammadu Buhari (PMB), changed the date of Democracy Day in Nigeria from May 29 to June 12. This was done to honour late Chief Moshood Kashimowo Olawale Abiola, a devout Muslim and winner of the June 12, 1993 presidential election, the results of which were annulled by former military president, General Ibrahim Badamasi Babangida (IBB). As explained by the Senior SpecialAssistant to the President on Media and Publicity, Mr. Garba Shehu, it was to ‘honour an illustrious son of Nigeria...who won a presidential election but was prevented from taking office when the results were annulled. The lateAbiola died while struggling to actualise the mandate.’
As further explained by PMB himself, ‘June 12, 1993 was far more symbolic of democracy in the Nigerian context than May 29 or even October 1. June 12, 1993 was the day when Nigerians, in millions, expressed their democratic will in what was undisputedly the freest, fairest and most peaceful elections since our independence. The fact that the outcome of that election was not upheld by the then military does not detract from the democratic credentials of that process.’ Therefore, PMB has said, his government ‘has decided that henceforth, June 12 will be celebrated as Democracy Day.’
It is in light of these considerations that PMB has also awarded Chief MKOAbiola post-humously the honour of Grand Commander of the Federal Republic (GCFR), which is Nigeria’s highest honour, normally given to an incumbent President of Nigeria, and Grand Commander of the Order of Niger (GCON), the second highest national honour of the land, to his then running mate, Babagana Kingibe.
The honour for ChiefAbiola, it should be emphasized, is specially significant for many reasons. First, all efforts made in the past twenty-five years to have ChiefAbiola nationally recognised and honoured have failed. Secondly, ChiefAbiola has become the first Nigerian president we never had. He was duly elected but could not have his electoral mandate actualised. Thirdly, the national honour and the act of declaration of June 12 as the new democracy day have generated lively public interest and controversies. There is near national consensus on the adoption of June 12 as the new Democracy Day in the country but the need to first have the NationalAssembly amend the 1999 Constitution, as amended, to enable Government act within the frame of rule of law still remains a controversy as many questions are being raised on the extent of legality of awarding the GCFR to a dead person.
As regards June 12, 1993, there is no disputing the fact that Chief MKOAbiola was truly elected the de facto President of Nigeria; that he was, indeed, prevented from actualising his mandate for illegal and untenable reasons of force majeure, given by IBB; and that he would have also eventually been sworn in as the de jure President of Nigeria, under normal circumstances.As the de jure President of Nigeria, he would have been given the National Honour of GCFR in his own right as an elected president of Nigeria. Giving an honour normally due in 1993 in 2018 is unnecessarily belated but still requires special further reflections.
In this regard, there would not have been any good basis for the advent of the Fourth Republic to begin with. The protracted period between June 12, 1993 and May 29, 1999 would not have been a political issue. In fact, Chief Olusegun Obasanjo might have not at all come into the picture as a presidential candidate. It was precisely because ChiefAbiola’s electoral mandate was stolen by the military government of IBB that June 12, not only became a national controversy and a new political struggle, but also given an international attraction and importance.
It should be recalled that Nigerians, led by the then NADECO (National Democratic Coalition), wanted June 12 as Nigeria’s Democracy Day in 1999 but President Olusegun Obasanjo was opposed to it. Subsequent leaders also did not take the matter up seriously. Consequently, what PMB has done by conferring the title of GCFR on Chief MKOAbiola post-humously and changing the date of Democracy Day from May 29 to June 12, is in the right direction. It is politically right, even if it conflicts with the spirit and provision of the 1963 National HonoursAct. It has the potential to remove the political wounds that have divided the polity for more than two decades.And true, it is not only political tension defusing, but also political stability seeking, national reconciliation and nationbuilding oriented. It is sagacious in strategic calculation and suggesting that PMB, for the first time in his three-year administration, is now beginning to see clearly how to govern without engagement in politics of dictatorial democracy.And true enough, the title of the honour should not be GCFR but SGCFR, that is, Special Grand Commander of the Federal Republic, because Chief MKOAbiola’s honour is with a difference and special distinction.
Expectedly, the change of date and award of national honour has generated interesting controversies. It was former President Olusegun Obasanjo who chose the initial date of May 29, apparently to reflect the beginning of a new era of democratic politics in Nigeria as from May 29, 1999. Before then, Nigeria was under sixteen years of uninterrupted military dictatorship and oppression. The transition from military to civilian rule on May 29, 1999 was, therefore, considered significant enough to be marked, if not celebrated, annually.
In the eyes of most Nigerians, and particularly the NADECO activists, June 12, 1993 ought to be remembered for posterity, especially because of its political significance. For instance, Chief MKOAbiola and his presidential running mate, Babagana Gingibe, were both Muslims and Nigerians were not in any way much bothered about religious status. SenatorAyo Fasanmi, in commending PMB for the new date and honour, said, ‘Abiola, a Yoruba man, was accepted in the North, East and West. Despite a Muslim/Muslim ticket, Nigerians, irrespective of religious and tribal affiliation, supported him and voted massively for him in all parts of the country.’
Secondly, the June 12, 1993 presidential election was not only nationally, but also internationally, adjudged the most fair, credible, and free ever conducted in Nigeria’s political post-independence history. Thirdly, and perhaps most importantly, it was the first time the people of Nigeria were most unanimously united in support of the adoption of the Professor Humphrey Nwosu-introduced OptionA-4 method of election, which guaranteed the freest and fairest election in Nigeria. Fourthly, and more notably, IBB has acknowledged this fact.
In an interview granted in a TV programme, ‘Moments with MoAbudu on MNet Channel of DSTV,’ he admitted that the ‘June 12 presidential election was accepted by Nigerians as the best of elections in Nigeria. It was free and fair.’ ‘But unfortunately,’ he said ‘we cancelled that election. I used the word unfortunately for the first time. We were in government at the time and we knew the possible consequences of handing over to a democratic government. We did well that we wanted ours to be the last military coup d’état. To be honest..., the situation was not ripe to hand over at the time.’
If the time was not ripe to hand over to MKOAbiola or to civilians, why organise the election in the first instance? If the election was annulled to prevent an impending new coup, why not round up the potential coup plotters since IBB was almost very certain that there would be a coup in the following six months? Why not deal with potential coup-making rather than annul election results? If the election was won byAlhaji Bashir Tofa, would the election results have been annulled?
Without scintilla of doubt, this is one of the origins of the injustice and political chicanery that has bedevilled Nigeria since then and which PMB has now courageously tried to redress. In other words, there are good reasons to consider June 12 as national day of democracy, especially if lessons are to be drawn from political history for the betterment of the future. Put differently, PMB’s initiatives have more moral and legal dimensions than political and strategic calculations.
Concerning the award of GCFR to Chief MKOAbiola, former Chief Justice of Nigeria (2006-2007) and also Chairman of the 2016 National Honours Committee, JusticeAlfa Belgore, has said national honours, and particularly, the GCFR, cannot be awarded post-humously. Under the 1963 National HonoursAct, Justice Belgore has reminded that only soldiers or other servicemen could be awarded post-humous medals for their bravery. In the thinking of the former Chief Justice, the only thing PMB can rightly do ‘is to name a place after him, but national honours award, no.’ The award of GCFR to a civilian or non-soldier, and for that matter, to a dead person, is illegal in his eyes.
Justice Belgore appears to have reckoned essentially with Section 2 of the 1963 National HonoursAct (Paragraph 2, Honours Warrant), according to which ‘a person shall be appointed to a particular rank of an Order when he receives from the President in person, at an investiture held for the purpose...’ On the basis of this provision, an honour of whatever rank can only be given by a sitting president. It can only be given during a ceremony specifically organised for the purpose. The honour can only be received in person, thus eliminating any delegated representation.And, perhaps most significantly, it is only at the juncture of receiving the honour in person, and regardless of the form of the honour, that the recipient is truly honoured.
In the thinking of Barrister Femi Falana, SeniorAdvocate of Nigeria, for example, there is nothing illegal about the award and change of date. On the award, he argued that Justice Belgore had simply ignored paragraph 3 of the same Honours Warrant which enables the president unqualified discretion ‘to dispense with the requirement of paragraph 2 in such manner as may be specified in the direction.’ Therefore, Falana has further submitted, ‘since the national awards conferred on ChiefAbiola and Chief Gani Fawehinmi cannot be received in person, the president may permit their family members to receive same on their behalf.’
To a great extent, Falana, an academic writer by choice and Senior Advocate of Nigeria, cannot be wrong in the sense that the president has the competence to permit any of theAbiola’s relations to receive the award of honour on behalf of ChiefAbiola. However, to what extent is the honour validly awarded if it is not received by the expected original recipient? In international protocolar and diplomatic practice, when an award of honour is given through a delegated representative, the representative is never decorated with the medal, but simply handed over to him or her. This is simply to say that only the intended recipient can receive it and be decorated.
Additionally, as noted earlier, it is only at the point an honour is received in person that the honour is also conferred. In this regard, on who is the award conferred: to the relation or to the deceased? This question raises the procedural question of the award. Dr. UmarArdo of the University of Maiduguri, has posited that ‘legally, the president has no powers to confer National Honours on anyone without the deliberation and advice of the National Council of States (NCS). The Third Schedule of the Constitution of Nigeria (as amended) at Section 6(a)iii confers on the NCS the powers to advise the president on the award of national honours. The fact is that the NCS didn’t meet to deliberate and advise on this so-called investiture.’
As much as one would want to appreciate this argument, does the provision make it a desideratum, that is, must the NCS first advise before the president can act? In the event of an advice by the NCS, must the president always accept whatever advice is given? This is where not only Justice Belgore and Barrister Falana are both correct and the moral issues of justice, fairness, national reconciliation, peace and unity are not only raised butought to be given priority of consideration and where PMB has really done well in political reasoning and calculations.
(See concluding part on www.thisdaylive.com)