When in May this year, President Muhammadu Buhari announced June 12 as the nation’s new date for the commemoration of the return of democracy, with the conferment of a posthumous honorary award to the acclaimed winner of the June 12, 1993 general elections, Chief MKO Abiola, the move was greeted with mixed feelings. Joshua Egbodo recaptures recent debate on the issue.
The ascent of May 29
May 29, 1999 the day former President Olusegun Obasanjo, after challenging struggles to get the country back to democratic governance, took over power from the exiting military government under Gen. Abdulsalami Abubakar, was declared a national public holiday to symbolise the nation’s return to democracy after years of attempts at attaining democratic rule. The 1999 proclamation was subsequently recognised in Nigeria’s Public Holidays Act.
Buahri’s declaration of June 12 was, therefore, tagged an act of politicking, and the allusion gained grounds to a great extent, more so since the President took the action in the wake of Obasanjo’s suggestion that he retires after his ongoing term expected to terminate on May 29, 2019 rather than seek re-election for a second term, so he (Buahri) can join his predecessors as an elder statesman. To many, the June 12 declaration was a move to spite Obasanjo, who for eight years on the throne could not honour his kinsman in the manner Buhari has done.
No legislative backing
Beyond the pronouncement at that time, which created uproar in both houses of the National Assembly over the propriety or otherwise of between May 29 and June 12 should be the nation’s democracy day commemoration, President Buhari did not approach the parliament for an amendment to the Public Holidays Act, to give his new date a legislative backing.
Politicking debate on June 12
So when last Thursday, a bill seeking to amend the extant Public Holidays Act, with intent to recognize June 12 as the new Democracy Day was listed for a second reading consideration on the Order Paper of the House of Representatives, it generated discordance as members came up with opposing views, especially as they tow the path of political parties’ inclinations. While members on the platform of the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC) okayed the proposal, opposition elements in the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) questioned the rationale behind the proposed change.
Titled “A Bill for an Act to amend the Public Holidays Act, Cap P40 Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 2004 to bring the Act in tandem with the current realities and exigencies of the modern times and to declare June 12 as Democracy Day in Nigeria and for Related Matters”, chairman of the House Committee on Rules and Business, and sponsor of the Bill, Hon. Edward Pwajok while leading debate on its general principles noted that the proposed legislation if enacted, will give legitimacy to President Buhari’s declaration of June 12 as the nation’s new Democracy Day.
Members, who kicked against the Bill, however, queried the significance of the new proposed day, when juxtaposed with the years long May 29 practice of transition of power, and whether that would now be altered, even as they conceded that the June 12, 1993 elections were adjudged the most free and fair in the history of Nigeria.
Some of the lawmakers also accused Buhari of not allowing democracy to thrive in Nigeria, with the deployment of state might to curry favour to his party, the APC in the few staggered elections so far conducted under his watch as the Commander-in-Chief of the nation’s Armed Forces. These lawmakers recalled that the incumbent President had personally truncated democracy in the past as a serving military officer in 1983, and so needed “to be schooled on the tenets of democracy”.
And so it was with those who felt very passionate about passing the proposed amendment into law, as most of them posited that the annulment of an election considered to be the fairest can only be re-instituted through recognition of the day as the real Democracy Day. According to them, President Buhari should be commended for recognizing Abiola, without concerns of political party affiliations.
In his submissions, Hon. Aminu Suleiman, a member on the APC’s platform from Kano State, appreciated President Buhari for honouring late Chief Abiola, as in his consideration, the action would help heal the wounds caused by the unfortunate annulment of the June 12,1993 presidential election. “I had the privilege of walking on the streets of Lagos for the actualisation of the mandate of Chief Moshood Abiola, despite coming from the same state as his opponent. We should give legal backing to the intervention of the president. What we are doing is to build the process of healing”, he said
Other members of the ruling APC who spoke in support of the Bill also described the President’s action, as well as the proposed Bill to recognize June 12 as a step in the best direction.
However, opposition members insisted that there were political connotations to the move. They also insisted that there was no genuine will behind the pronouncement especially noting that the President did not deem it fit to follow it up with a Bill to the parliament to give the declaration a legal status.
Sergius Ogun, a PDP member from Edo State accused the President of simply playing to the gallery by declaring June 12 as Democracy Day, arguing that what Nigerians are thinking of at the moment was to see free, fair and credible polls in 2019. “What is the purpose of the amendment? Why do we need to change Democracy Day from May 29 to June 12?”, a member on the platform of the PDP, and chairman of the Committee on Public Accounts also argued, adding that: “this (the Bill) should have been an executive Bill, if the pronouncement was not done with political intention. If truly we are sincere, we should match our words with actions”.
Dogara’s intervention
Feelers from independent observers suggested that politics took over the stage in the course of the debate, but acknowledged the doggedness of Speaker of the House, Hon. Yakubu Dogara to get the Bill through second reading. For when the second reading question on the Bill put for voice vote, there was seemingly a higher thunderous shout of “nay”. But he subtly gave the ruling in favour of the “aye” voters.
Dogara had prior to putting the question appealed to his colleagues that granted, the approach of the President may have breached the right procedures, but that it was better the right thing is done.
“Two wrongs cannot make a right. We should be guided by what is right. In the spirit of national interest, we should, therefore, not be bothered by any other sentiment now”, he said before putting question, and subsequently brought down the gavel in approval for second reading of the Bill.
A twist also in the suspicious politicking according to followers of the matter was the Speaker’s decision to directly refer the Bill to the committee of the whole House, signalling the skipping of a public hearing for the Bill to face a third reading hurdle. Questions are raised on why the Speaker, now a member of the opposition PDP ‘betrayed’ his fellow party members. Though not a breach, as the House Rules allows the presiding officer such discretions in some referral cases, it may be a bigger task getting the Bill through the last stage; if at all its consideration comes in the life of the current assembly of the House.
