Lawyers call for Babangida’s prosecution over June 12 poll annulment

The release of General Ibrahim Babangida’s autobiography, A Journey in Service, has sparked widespread controversy, with many Nigerians and human rights groups calling for his prosecution, writes Onozure Dania

More than three decades after the annulment of the June 12, 1993, presidential election, the wounds of that historic event remain fresh. The election, widely regarded as Nigeria’s freest and fairest, was abruptly annulled by then-military ruler General Ibrahim Babangida, triggering nationwide unrest and paving the way for years of military rule.

Despite the passage of time, the demand for accountability and justice for the victims of the annulment remains strong. The launch of Babangida’s book last Thursday in Abuja reignited criticism, particularly as he publicly admitted to annulling the election. His admission has renewed calls for legal action, with many Nigerians demanding that he be held accountable.

Both individuals and groups were loud in their critique of Babangida’s public admission. Social media has become a major platform for public outrage, with individuals and groups condemning Babangida’s role in the annulment. The Committee for the Defence of Human Rights (CDHR) has called for his prosecution, describing the annulment as a “coup d’état” against democracy. CDHR contends that Babangida’s admission is an attempt to deceive Nigerians into believing he acted in good faith, arguing that his actions amount to crimes against humanity.

The CDHR held that Babangida’s actions met the threshold of crimes against humanity and warranted prosecution. The group called on President Bola Tinubu to take immediate action, noting that Babangida’s confession was sufficient evidence for legal action. The group’s president, Debo Adeniran, emphasized that the annulment of the June 12 election was a grave injustice that undermined democracy and destabilized the nation.

“The reckless, illegal, and unconstitutional annulment of the June 12 election remains one of the gravest injustices inflicted upon Nigerians, undermining democracy and destabilizing the nation,” Adeniran said.

There have been mixed reactions from lawyers to Babangida’s public admission of error. On whether Babangida should be prosecuted, a senior advocate of Nigeria and former president of the Nigerian Bar Association Dr Olisa Agbakoba expressed little interest in the recent apology offered by Babangida regarding the annulment of the 1993 presidential election.

Agbakoba, who is known for his outspoken views on national issues stated, “I’m frankly not interested in IBB and his book apology. It won’t change what Nigerians are going through today.”

Agbakoba’s remarks point to the frustrations of many Nigerians who feel that apologies and historical reflections do not fix the pressing challenges faced by the country today. “My policy is to always advise any president to make the best of his time in office to do the best to develop the country,” Agbakoba said.

Mike Ozekhome (SAN), queried if IBB’s apology healed the wounds and bruised hearts of Nigerians. He decried the missteps that happened in quick succession, describing the accident of history as most regrettable. He, however, said he expected Nigerians to forgive IBB for having opened up to his error.

“For years, IBB prevaricated on the annulment, claiming he did it in the best national interest. But on Thursday the 20th of February, 2025, Babangida during the presentation of his memoirs, ‘A Journey In Service,’ pointedly accepted full responsibility for the decisions taken and for June 12.

“I want to salute Babangida for having the courage and humility to own up like a man; that everything that happened during the June 12 crisis took place under him as the head of state and Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.

“I salute him for acknowledging that his government which organised unarguably the freest, fairest and most credible elections in the electoral history of Nigeria, when it introduced option A4 which was hitherto unknown to Nigeria or the world.

“To me, that he has come out to open up to doing something wrong and egregious to a bleeding nation should be appreciated. I believe that Nigerians should forgive him because to err is human and to forgive is divine. I have now forgiven him because I was also a victim of the June 12 crisis,” he said.

Abiodun  Olatunji, (SAN) said the roll-call of former leaders who attended the launch of “A Journey in Service: An Autobiography of Ibrahim Babangida” is quite revealing.

According to him, beyond the presence of the incumbent president, all other attendees are individuals who, at one time or another, benefited from the supreme sacrifice made by the winner of the most peaceful, credible, free, and fair presidential election ever conducted in the history of Nigeria.

He regretted the failure of leaders, while in office, to use the opportunity to correct the grave injustice occasioned by the annulment of the 1993 presidential election.

Rather than right the wrongs of history, he said it was baffling that such leaders chose self-aggrandizement, revisionism, and silence, behaving as though nothing significant happened on June 12, 1993. According to him, Chief Olusegun Obasanjo and Alhaji Atiku Abubakar, who ruled Nigeria from 1999 to 2007, deliberately ignored the historical significance of that election and the supreme sacrifice made by its winner, Chief M.K.O. Abiola.

“General Abdulsalami Abubakar, under whose watch Chief Abiola mysteriously died in detention, failed to take any meaningful step toward addressing the injustice. Dr Goodluck Jonathan, despite spending six years in office, did nothing of substance in this regard—his only attempt being the feeble and politically motivated move to rename the University of Lagos after Abiola when his administration was already losing credibility.

“That attempt was widely resisted by those who saw it as a token gesture rather than a genuine act of justice.

“Each of these leaders had the moral and constitutional opportunity to formally announce the election results and recognize Chief Abiola as the rightful winner and President-elect who was unjustly denied the chance to serve.

“Such an act would have offered a long-overdue closure and helped heal the wounds inflicted on the national psyche. Yet, none of them took this necessary step,” he said.

He continued, “It is quite ironic that these same leaders have now gathered to honour the man who, without justification, annulled the will of millions of Nigerians and, for 32 years, refused to acknowledge the monumental injustice he committed.

“Now, in his twilight years, he seeks to revise history, admitting regret for a decision that altered the course of Nigeria’s democracy and inflicted untold hardship on the people.

“Even more astonishing is that these leaders, rather than demanding full accountability and a contrite acknowledgement of wrongdoing, are instead celebrating him under the guise of national reconciliation, declaring that the nation must move on.

“Yes, Nigeria must move on, but not at the expense of truth, justice, and accountability. The lessons of history must not be forgotten.

“We cannot afford to repeat the mistakes of the past by whitewashing the failures of leadership that wrecked lives, led to the deaths of countless innocent Nigerians, permanently dislocated families, and directly ushered in the most corrupt, despotic, and ruinous regime in our nation’s history.

“If moving on means ignoring history and celebrating those who failed Nigeria at critical moments, then we risk setting the stage for future betrayals of public trust. A true reckoning is what the nation deserves—not revisionist glorification,” he said.

Another lawyer, Joseph Nwobike (SAN),  said General Babangida has done well to author the book, adding that the book has also given Nigerians insight into several national issues that defined his administration and the period that he managed the political and legislative authorities in Nigeria.

Nwobike stated,” One thing that we should agree on is that General Babangida contributed to the development of Nigeria that we have today. Agreed that the opinion on how he governed Nigeria will certainly be divided, it cannot be said that there are no positive changes introduced by his administration.

“I must also point out that his lowest point of performance was the annulment of the June 12 presidential elections alleged to have been won by the late Chief MKO Abiola. I will wish him well and hope that his book will help to guide our current and future leaders to organize our affairs properly and productively.”

Also, Monday Ubani (SAN) stated that while Babangida’s admission of wrong is a step towards forgiveness, the road to reconciliation with Nigerians is more complex. Ubani described Babangida’s regret as a positive gesture, especially as it came while the former president was still alive, allowing him the chance to seek forgiveness before meeting his maker.

“It’s good that he regrets it before he meets his maker,” Ubani remarked.

Ubani stated that many people are unwilling to admit their wrongs, particularly when it comes to significant decisions.

“To say that what I did in life was wrong, to me, is a sign of a strong man,” he said.

He stressed that apologising demonstrates humility and strength.

However, Ubani also pointed out that while Babangida’s public apology may be a step toward forgiveness from God, the question of whether Nigerians, especially those affected by the annulment of the 1993 presidential election, will forgive him remains uncertain.

“Whether Nigerians will forgive him, it’s a different ballgame,” Ubani noted, acknowledging the deep impact of Babangida’s actions on the country.

Mr Laolu Owolabi (SAN), expressed doubts about the viability of prosecuting Babangida for annulling the June 12, 1993, presidential election. According to Owolabi, the call for IBB’s prosecution may not yield results due to existing decrees that grant immunity to military regimes’ actions and legislation.

“I am not sure that the call for IBB’s prosecution is viable. CDHR is aware that every officer who participated in a military coup that truncated democratic regimes have continued to roam free and some of them even attended the book launch,” he said.

Owolabi added that the basis of this freedom is that there is a decree which grants immunity to acts and legislation of military regimes.

He said, ”While not on the same parallel, it draws similarity from the amnesty granted by Joe Biden to a couple of people including his children and Anthony Fauci.

“Furthermore, there is prosecutorial discretion which is not immune from political office holders’ influence. With Tinubu attending and fawning over IBB, not to mention Peter Obi, IBB would walk free till the end of his days.

“Section 6(6) (d) of the 1999 Constitution restricts judicial powers from questioning decrees and laws made by the military governments since 1966.”

Meanwhile, human rights activist Mr. Femi Falana, (SAN), has said he would take legal action against the former military ruler for his role in numerous violations of fundamental human rights.

Falana who spoke on Channels TV’s “Politics Today,” stated his intention to challenge the malicious prosecution he and his colleagues faced during the military regime.

The lawyer said that late Major General Mamman Vatsa and others were sentenced to death over a “phantom coup,” adding that “the case of Mamman Vatsa was a premeditated murder.”

Falana recounted how, during the June 12 struggle, peaceful protests erupted across Nigeria.

He explained that it was General Babangida who ordered the arrest of prominent activists like the late Chief Gani Fawehinmi, Dr. Beko Ransome-Kuti, and himself.

Falana stated that the three of them were detained and brought to Abuja, where they faced charges of unlawful assembly, conspiracy, and sedition before a Chief Magistrate’s Court.

Falana detailed the sedition charge, stating that it stemmed from their publication of election results that IBB had refused to release, which was considered a criminal act at the time.

He said the military regime believed that by silencing them and sending them to Kuje Prison, the protests would cease.

Falana further criticized IBB’s refusal to apologise for the annulment of the June 12 election.

He pointed out that IBB’s failure to acknowledge the injustice done to him and others demonstrates a lack of accountability.

“No apology has been offered for our wrongful arrests and detentions. So, I am going to sue the General for engaging in massive violations of fundamental human rights,” Falana said.

While reflecting on the broader political landscape, Falana recalled that in 1985, IBB and his colleagues had promised to leave office in 1990.

However, as the years passed, IBB postponed his exit repeatedly, eventually shifting the date to 1993.

Falana added that his fellow activists organised protests against the regime, including the widely popular “IBB Must Go” campaign.

He also noted that he and his colleagues (Dr. Beko Ransome-Kuti and Chief Fawehinmi) were imprisoned, denied access to their lawyers, and forced to defend themselves.

Despite these efforts, he added that they remained resolute in their commitment to challenge IBB’s regime for its abuses.

Falana further revisited the tragic death of journalist Dele Giwa, alleging that the IBB regime had him killed without justification.

The military junta’s response to Giwa’s murder and the subsequent cover-up was part of a larger pattern of impunity, according to Falana.

He stated that despite initial promises of a public inquiry, the government stifled efforts to bring those responsible to justice.

Babangida’s admission will continue to spark debates about justice, accountability, and the legacy of the June 12 annulment. While some legal experts call for prosecution, others argue that legal and political constraints make such efforts unlikely. The broader question remains whether Nigeria can truly move forward without addressing the injustices of its past.