THE 42-year rule of the former Libyan strongman, Muammar Gadaffi, finally came to an end with his capture and eventual death in the hands of his captors.

The whereabouts of Gadaffi had been controversial and speculative since the Northern Atlantic Treaty Organisation, NATO, forces and the fighters of the National Transition Council, NTC, sacked the former dictator.

Gadaffi’s rule had been described as despotic, brutal and terrific, to say the least. Now that the man is gone, we need to ponder over a number of issues that we could learn one or two things from.

Before his capture, Gadaffi had the opportunity to lay down arms and relinquish power. He never did. What we heard from his hideout were threats and missiles, suggesting that embracing peace and reconciliation would be his last option. As I noted in my previous article that his fate may not be far from his statement, “promising to die here as a martyr” (The Nation, September 16, 2011).

I wondered what must have been going on in his mind – What happens to my enormous wealth? How about my family? So many things, I am sure. Well, that is now history. What has now dominated the human rights circles is the way and manner Gadaffi was captured and killed. He was never given an opportunity to state his own case … but ‘The Man Died!’

Already, the United Nations and Amnesty International have called for an investigation into the circumstances leading to his death, after his capture along with other civilians. According to allAfrica.com: “NATO forces became culpable of what they were meant to prevent, namely, the killing of civilians. In fact, NATO may not be exonerated for the deaths of some of the more than 1,000 people reported to have died in Tripoli in rebels offensive on the capital.

Experts in international relations and law have decried the summary execution of Gadaffi through extra-juducial means, although the NTC had alleged that he was shot during “crossfire” with loyalists.

Several versions of Gadaffi’s last moments have been unfolded. The Herald of October 24, 2011 stated that “a bloodied and shaken Gadaffi was dragged away from a drainaged pipe where he was found by angry fighters. He was then hauled on to the bonnet of a truck and held by the crowd as they slapped and pushed him. With blood, pouring from his face, he tells the rebel fighters, a number of times, ‘God forbids this’ ”.

Similarly, “Dr. Othman al-Zintani, carried out the autopsy on Gadaffi’s body at a morgue in Misrata. Speaking afterwards, he said it was ‘obvious’ the former dictator had died from a bullet to the head” (The Punch, October 24, 2011).

The demise of Gadaffi has, once again, re-opened the sad tale of the desperate disposition of African leaders holding on to power at all cost. The likes of Hosni Mubarak of Egypt, Mobutu Sese Sekou of Zaire(now Democratic Republic of Congo), Idi Amin of Uganda and Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe, ferociously held on to power, not minding the yearnings of their people for change and development.

In their bid to desperately hang on to power, these ‘leaders’ squandered their nations’ hard earned resources by acquiring arms and ammunition, from developed nations, to suppress the collective will of the people and tenets of democracy.

That is why cases of political assassinations, severe corruption, poverty, looting of public treasury, suppression of press freedom are the trademarks of despotic rule of these African leaders.

The current wind of change blowing across Africa and other parts of the world, brings to the fore, the sacred need for leaders in Syria, Yemen and a few other nations, still grappling in draconian hegemony, should wake up to the realities of the day and opt for civil rule. They should learn from other climes and avoid being caught in the web of imminent, violent change.

Now that the Gadaffi era is over, what the NTC should pursue, as a matter of urgency are reconciliation, reconstruction and restoration. The first step is the maintenance of unity of members by preventing possible internal conflict among its leaders, which could spark-off civil unrest. Therefore, a conducive environment should be put in place to initiate genuine dialogue, to bring all warring factions together in rebuilding a post-Gadaffi Libya, as no nation ever survives two civil wars.

Secondly, the economy should be revamped without delay. As a Rentier state – relying heavily on oil profits – it should diversify its industries, which will be germaine for the liberalisation of financial markets, in which the civil war experience could be a catalyst. Already, Libya’s provisional leader, Mustafa Abdul-Jalil, has set the tone that “there are good intentions to regulate all banking laws” by promoting Islamic banking, as he insisted that conventional banking practice is exploitative and “creates disease and hatred among the people”.

NTC should avoid latching on the current arrangement to stay longer in power unnecessarily. It is meant to be a transitional body and so its leaders must not jostle for tenure elongation which is a common parlance among African leaders.

A new constitution should be produced that will take care of the aspirations and yearnings of the people. The sensitive issue of ideological and cultural differences between the East (Benghazi) and West (Tripoli) should be resolved.

An enduring peace, development and legacy will be enshrined when a full-fledged democracy is instituted. The transition government should organise free and fair elections in which candidates will be given unhindered opportunity to contest for elective positions.

The intervention role of NATO and allied forces is commendable. It will amount to ‘political burden’ to the people of Libya if they stay longer than necessary. The sovereignty of the nation may be jeopardized if its advantage of being strategically located between Egypt, Tunisia and the Sahel, is abused. In 1970, Gadaffi closed the American Wheelus Air Base, near Tripoli, to protect the country’s territorial integrity.

They should realise that genuine reconstruction, reconciliation and restoration are better handled by Libyans themselves – who own their future.

But for Gadaffi and the rest of us, we sympathise with Libya for passing through its trying and difficult phase in its political life. The shape of things to come is a common destiny Libyans, have fought for. This must be sustained and consolidated. That should be the challenge for all stakeholders – United Nations, African Union and most importantly, the Libyan people.

Mr. BY  ADEWALE  KUPOLUYI wrote from University of Agriculture, Abeokuta, Ogun State.