Like the proverbial calabash that refuses to sink, the controversy surrounding the annulment of the June 12, 1993 presidential election continues to resurface. Now, Ose Anenih, son of the late Chief Tony Anenih, has weighed in—firmly rejecting what he describes as a false account of his father’s role, as presented by Bayo Onanuga, Special Adviser to President Bola Ahmed Tinubu on Information and Strategy.
In a statement posted on X (formerly Twitter), Ose Anenih said:
“Your account of my father’s involvement in June 12 is, to put it politely, untrue. It is disappointing that you chose to use uncouth language to describe Chief Tony Anenih—and in an official communication from the Presidency, no less.
“I will rise above the emotional baiting that this conversation has clearly sparked and speak only to the truth. I will also assume your mischaracterisation of historical events stems from ignorance, not malice.”
Ose Anenih recalled that his father had warned Chief MKO Abiola about the dangers of aligning too closely with General Sani Abacha—advice Abiola disregarded at great cost.
“After the annulment of the June 12 election by Gen. Babangida, Chief Abiola initially fled the country. Upon his return, one of his first stops was my father’s residence in Benin City. At that time, my father was National Chairman of the Social Democratic Party (SDP).
“My father confronted Abiola directly, accusing him of abandoning the party and its members who risked their lives defending his mandate.”
Anenih also referenced how his father acknowledged Bola Tinubu’s stance against the delayed announcement of the June 12 results:
“I am not aware of any animosity between my father and President Tinubu. In fact, my father acknowledged that Tinubu spoke out against the delay in announcing the results of the June 12 election—one of the few mentions Tinubu received in his 260-page memoir.
“However, I find it curious that your principal’s early visit to Abacha following a coup is now being spun as an act of valor.”
He challenged Onanuga’s version of events, noting that several principal actors in that period—IBB, Abdulsalami, Oyegun, Ikimi, David Mark, Ayu, Dele Momodu, and MKO’s son Kola Abiola—are still alive and capable of providing their own accounts.
“Fortunately, my father documented his version of these events before his passing. I would be happy to send you a copy of his memoir, My Life and Nigerian Politics, to help you avoid such ahistorical missteps in the future.”
Ose expressed dismay at having to publicly defend his late father against what he termed “a lie issued in the name of the President.”
“It is unfortunate that I must respond to such blatant misinformation—and doubly unfortunate that it came from the Presidency itself. I had hoped this kind of toxic revisionism had ended with the previous occupant of your office.”
Background: A Renewed Political Rift Over June 12
This latest dispute follows comments by former Jigawa State Governor, Sule Lamido, who recently claimed that President Tinubu played a role in the annulment of the June 12, 1993 election—regarded by many as Nigeria’s freest and fairest, and won by Chief MKO Abiola.
In a statement on Sunday, presidential spokesperson Bayo Onanuga rebutted Lamido’s claims, accusing him of distorting history. He specifically denied the allegation that Tinubu’s mother, Alhaja Abibatu Mogaji, mobilized market women in support of the annulment.
Onanuga asserted that both Lamido—then SDP National Secretary—and Tony Anenih, the party chairman, capitulated to military rule and betrayed the people’s mandate.
He defended Tinubu’s record, citing his Senate speech on August 19, 1993, in which Tinubu reportedly denounced the annulment as a coup and urged resistance. Onanuga also highlighted Tinubu’s arrest during efforts to reconvene the dissolved Senate and his later exile and financial support to NADECO’s pro-democracy movement.
“The facts remain clear: President Tinubu was—and remains—a steadfast advocate for democracy, unlike Lamido and others who capitulated under military pressure,” the statement concluded.
Lamido, in response, continued to question Tinubu’s democratic legacy, stating:
“Tinubu became relevant only after Abacha took over. Before then, where were all these NADECO heroes?”
He even accused Tinubu’s mother of supporting Babangida and dismissed Tinubu’s exile as self-preserving, not self-sacrificing. Lamido concluded by declaring his readiness to join any political coalition aimed at removing Tinubu from power in 2027.
