By Douglass Anele
Some prominent Nigerians who are fond of heaping praises on late Abiola are sincere in their conviction that he deserves all the praises. But majority of pro-June 12 campaigners do not really think that the late politician was a “martyr for democracy”.

Instead, they are engaged in “eye service,” and wish to be addressed  as pro-democracy activists. Also, those among them with political ambition want to be seen as “politically correct,” so that they will be voted for by June 12 sympathisers  during elections. Pat Utomi, a theoretician of entrepreneurship, argued that June 12 should be memorialized as democracy day, because Abiola and other “heroes ensured we have democracy in Nigeria.”

But is he really sure that we really have democracy in Nigeria at the moment? Since 1970, has there been a real democratic government in our beleaguered country? The candid answer to these questions is –No! What we have been witnessing is continuous degeneration of governance nationwide. Indeed, since 1999, Nigeria has been operating lootocracy, which is government of the lootocrats, by the lootocrats and for the lootocrats.

The essential characteristics of a lootocratic government are greed, corruption, visionlessness and ineptitude, which are antithetical to democracy properly so-called. On Dele Momodu’s claim that June 12 is the saddest day for Nigeria, I affirm that he and others who hold the same view are suffering from historical amnesia. No doubt for members of Abiola’s family, other families that lost their loved ones during the riots caused by “June 12” and its aftermath, and millions of Nigerians who genuinely wanted Abiola to be president and voted for him, the annulment of the presidential election and death of the politician were  truly very sad occurrences indeed.

Yet, these tragedies are relatively minor when compared to the pogrom carried out by northerners against the Igbo in 1960s, and to the deaths of millions of Biafrans and property destroyed during the civil war. Memories of the horrors of the war may not be vivid in Momodu’s imagination –afterall, he was not a Biafran and, perhaps, did not experience the horrors of that war firsthand.

Nevertheless, no other tragedy in Nigeria since the amalgamation of 1914 is comparable to the brutality of the civil war. In fact, up to the present time, many families in the former Biafran territory are still suffering the negative consequences of that very war.

Therefore, the notion that June 12 is “the saddest day” for Nigeria is a myth. At this juncture, let us deconstruct the popular belief in certain quarters that Abiola fought for democracy. What exactly does “fighting for democracy” really mean? The best way to answer that question is to point to paradigmatic individuals in different parts of the world who are universally acknowledged as having fought for democracy in their countries. The living legend, Nelson Mandela, comes easily to mind here.

Mandela spent 27 years in prison because of his principled opposition to Apartheid. He, like everybody else in South Africa, had no idea of when he would regain his freedom, or even whether he would come out of prison alive. He must have turned down quid pro quo deals from the white supremacist regime in his country. Mandela did not nominate people for top political appointment in the hope that he might be freed. Indeed, the madiba saw his terrible ordeal as a core component of black struggle for the elimination of Apartheid.

His becoming South Africa’s president was just a natural outcome of the immense reputation he had built up over the decades, and an acknowledgement and appreciation of his unmatched contribution to the liberation struggle. Abiola’s case was different.

A well-known campaigner for the payment of reparation by the West to Africa as compensation for slavery and colonisation, the late politician post-humously achieved the status of “hero of democracy” just because of Ibrahim Babangida’s grotesque annulment of the June 12 presidential elections which he (Abiola) was poised to win. His death in detention while insisting on his “mandate” further strengthened the  impression that he was “a martyr for  democracy.”

To be candid, Abiola’s credential as a pro-democracy activist before the formation of the SDP was nothing to write home about. That was why late Beko Ransome-Kuti who, for some obscure reason, later changed his mind about Abiola and became a June 12 campaigner, was quoted by Karl Maier, in This house has fallen: Nigeria in Crisis, as saying that: “Before the election, there was no difference between Abiola, the military, Babangida.

One viewed him as part of the problems of the country.” I never met Abiola, but I greatly admire his philanthropic spirit and generosity. Definitely, several June 12 activists benefited a lot from his large-heartedness, and are showing their gratitude by exaggerating Abiola’s contributions to “democracy” in Nigeria.

Still, despite the subtle pressure to join the herd in mythologising him in order to be admired, it is better to realistically and honestly evaluate the pros and cons of his close relationship with the military and draw useful lessons from there.

Abiola was made by the military and was ultimately killed by the military also. Therefore, no serious politician should trust power-hungry soldiers, for all of them are crude Machiavellians!  CONCLUDED.