Nigeria’s history is replete with political turbulence, military coups, and controversial decisions that have shaped its trajectory.
Former Head of State, General Ibrahim Babangida (retd.), recently unveiled his autobiography, A Journey of Service where he sheds light on two of the most contentious events of his administration: the alleged coup led by General Mamman Vatsa and the annulment of the June 12, 1993, presidential election.
His revelations have reignited debates about justice, accountability, and the political landscape of Nigeria.The Alleged Vatsa Coup and ExecutionOne of the most striking revelations in Babangida’s book pertains to the 1986 coup attempt allegedly orchestrated by his childhood friend, General Mamman Vatsa.
According to Babangida, initial reports about a potential coup came as mere rumors, which he initially dismissed as jealousy-driven speculation due to his close relationship with Vatsa.
However, further intelligence gathering by military authorities reportedly revealed incontrovertible evidence that Vatsa had funded officers to execute the plot.Babangida narrates that when the accusations intensified, he personally confronted Vatsa, who denied all allegations. However, covert investigations allegedly exposed financial transactions, including a payment of N50,000 to Lt-Col. Musa Bitiyong, which Vatsa claimed was intended to support a farm project. Additional intelligence reports suggested that the coup plotters planned to bomb Eko Bridge, sabotage Air Force assets, and possibly hijack or shoot down the presidential aircraft.Following investigations, Vatsa and nine others were found guilty by a military tribunal and subsequently executed in March 1986.
Babangida admitted feeling personally betrayed but justified the decision as necessary to maintain national security. “They had planned a bloody coup which would have plunged the country into darkness. I had to choose between saving a friend’s life and the nation’s future,” he wrote.
The Vatsa Family’s Reaction and Calls for Justice
In response to Babangida’s account, the Vatsa family has maintained that the execution was unjust. Jonathan Vatsa, a family member, stated that Mamman Vatsa was denied his right to appeal before he was executed, questioning the urgency with which he was put to death.
Jonathan suggested that Vatsa was perceived as a threat to Babangida’s regime rather than a genuine coup plotter, insisting that Babangida owes not only an apology but also restitution for past injustices.
The June 12, 1993 Election Annulment
Another contentious issue addressed in Babangida’s autobiography is the annulment of the June 12, 1993, presidential election, widely regarded as Nigeria’s freest and fairest election.
Babangida confirmed that Chief Moshood Kashimawo Olawale (MKO) Abiola of the Social Democratic Party (SDP) won the election.
However, he claimed that his decision to annul it was influenced by powerful forces led by General Sani Abacha, who opposed the transition to civilian rule.
Babangida admitted that he regretted annulling the election but justified the decision as a means to prevent a potential civil war.
He stated that intelligence reports suggested Abiola’s assassination was imminent, and his elimination could have plunged Nigeria into another national crisis. “Having participated in one civil war, with all its horrors, pains, and devastation, I wasn’t prepared to see another,” he wrote.
Reactions from Abiola’s Family and Civil Society
Hafsat Abiola-Costello, MKO Abiola’s daughter, responded to Babangida’s revelations, stating that while his admission was significant, it did little to erase the pain suffered by her family and Nigerians.
She emphasized that June 12 was more than just an election; it represented the collective hope of Nigerians for a better and more united country.
Similarly, human rights activist Dr. Joe Odumakin criticized Babangida’s justification, calling it an attempt to rewrite history.
She accused him of engaging in “Maradona-style doublespeak” by simultaneously accepting responsibility for the annulment while blaming Abacha for its execution.
Odumakin pointed out that Babangida, as the Head of State, had the power to prevent the annulment but failed to do so.
Unanswered Questions and the Quest for Justice
Babangida’s revelations, rather than providing closure, have reopened old wounds and left many questions unanswered.
If he truly sought to protect Abiola, why did his administration fail to ensure a smooth transition? Why did he allow Abacha to play such a decisive role in national affairs?
Similarly, regarding Vatsa, was the coup evidence truly incontrovertible, or was it a calculated political elimination?
Beyond apologies, calls for restitution and accountability persist.
While Babangida remains a pivotal figure in Nigeria’s history, his legacy is one fraught with both development strides and controversial decisions.
As Nigeria continues to grapple with the effects of past political upheavals, the lessons from these episodes remain crucial for shaping the country’s democratic future.
