The history of Nigeria’s democracy is incomplete without the mention of Professor Humphrey Nwosu, who defied military pressure to conduct what is widely regarded as the freest and fairest election in the nation’s history.
As the chairman of the National Electoral Commission (NEC) during the Ibrahim Babangida (IBB) administration, Nwosu played a pivotal role in organizing the June 12, 1993 presidential election.
Despite threats, intimidation, and political manipulations, he demonstrated remarkable courage and integrity in ensuring that Nigerians exercised their democratic rights.
He made sure that the election was held despite the shenanigans by the military leadership and the Nigerian elites
Background of Prof. Humphrey Nwosu
Humphrey Nwosu, an Igbo man from Ajali in Anambra state, was appointed by General Ibrahim Babangida to oversee Nigeria’s electoral process. Before he was appointed NEC chairman, Nwosu was a political scientist and a professor who had an in-depth understanding of governance and electoral processes.
His leadership style was marked by innovation, as he introduced the Option A4 voting system, which promoted transparency by allowing voters to line up behind their preferred candidates. This system reduced electoral fraud and made rigging difficult.
The June 12, 1993 Election
Under Nwosu’s leadership, the election was conducted on June 12, 1993. The two contenders were Chief Moshood Kashimawo Olawale (MKO) Abiola of the Social Democratic Party (SDP) and Bashir Tofa of the National Republican Convention (NRC).
From all indications, the election was peaceful, free, and fair. However, before the final results could be officially announced, Babangida, under intense pressure from the military and political elites, annulled the election.
The results already announced indicated that Abiola was leading with a clear margin. Nwosu was stopped from completing the process and was eventually forced into silence. The military dissolved the National Electoral Commission(NEC), of which he was the chairman.
Before this time, he had made the results of the elections public to the Nigerian public.He ensured that the final results were pasted in the NEC’s public notice board in Garki,Abuja.
They also sacked him, and he no longer had any powers or authority to continue with the election or the declaration of results.
The Aftermath and Betrayal of Nwosu
The annulment of the election led to national outrage. Many Nigerian politicians, activists, and journalists fled the country to avoid persecution by the military regime. Among those who went into exile were Wole Soyinka, Bola Tinubu, and other pro-democracy activists.
However, despite facing immense pressure, Humphrey Nwosu did not flee.
Unlike many who later became vocal critics of the military, Nwosu remained in Nigeria, though he was silenced by the government.
In later years, when democracy was restored and the sacrifices of June 12 were being acknowledged, many politicians, especially from the Southwest (SW), opposed honoring Nwosu. They argued that since he did not publicly declare the final results, he was complicit in scuttling the election.
This stance was hypocritical, considering that the same people attended Babangida’s book launch and helped raise funds for the man who annulled the election. Rather than holding Babangida accountable, they shifted blame to Nwosu, a man who had risked his life to conduct the election.
IBB’s Justification and the Role of Justice Dahiru Saleh
Several figures in Babangida’s government, including David Mark, defended the annulment, citing a court injunction that had ordered a halt to the election. However, this reasoning was widely seen as an excuse to prevent the democratic transition.
The same government that allowed the election to proceed suddenly found a reason to invalidate it when it became clear that Abiola had won.
This raises questions about the true motivations behind the annulment and the role of vested interests in undermining Nigeria’s democracy.
Nwosu’s Courage and Unfair Treatment
Prof Nwosu was ready with the results except for Taraba state, which had yet to be collated. He could not announce the results without including all the states. Unfortunately, before he could get his hands on that result and finally announce the winner, Justice Dahiru Saleh ordered him to stop announcing the results. While he was battling this, the military ruling council, led by IBB, dissolved NEC and sacked him.
Despite the criticisms leveled against him, Nwosu displayed exceptional bravery. He could have easily chosen the path of self-preservation by fleeing, like many others, but he chose to stay.
He stood firm in his principles, even in the face of threats from the military.
His silence in the years following the annulment was not an admission of guilt but a testament to the oppressive environment in which he found himself. Unlike many who later rebranded themselves as pro-democracy heroes after returning from exile, Nwosu had no such luxury.
The refusal to recognize his role in the June 12 struggle is a grave injustice, It depicts the ignorance of many Nigerian politicians and their penchant for diminishing the contribution of Igbos to the Nigerian project.
If Babangida and his associates, who actively worked against the election, are still being celebrated in some quarters, why should Nwosu be vilified for being a victim of circumstances beyond his control?
The Hypocrisy of Nigerian Politicians
The stance of some politicians who opposed honoring Nwosu reflects the double standards that pervade Nigerian politics. While they condemned him for not announcing the results, they conveniently ignored the fact that the military government had made it impossible for him to do so.
These same politicians did not extend similar criticism to Babangida, the man who wielded the power to uphold or annul the election. Instead, they attended his events, supported his projects, and avoided holding him accountable.
This contradiction highlights the selective amnesia of Nigerian politics. Those who fled to safety during the crisis later returned to claim credit for fighting for democracy, while those who stayed and suffered the consequences were sidelined. Nwosu’s case is a prime example of how history can be manipulated to serve the interests of certain groups.
The Need to Recognize Nwosu’s Contributions
It is time for Nigeria to give Prof. Humphrey Nwosu the recognition he deserves. His efforts in ensuring a transparent electoral process should not be overshadowed by the political manipulations that followed.
If June 12 is to be truly acknowledged as a significant milestone in Nigeria’s democracy, then the role of those who facilitated it, including Nwosu, must be properly documented and honored.
Nigerians must also critically examine the hypocrisy of those who claim to be democracy’s champions. Selective justice and historical revisionism only serve to weaken the integrity of the country’s political history.
If Nigeria truly wants to honor the spirit of June 12, then it must start by giving credit to all those who contributed to the process, regardless of the challenges they faced.
The legacy of June 12 is not just about one man; it is about the collective struggle for democracy. However, among those who played a role, Prof. Humphrey Nwosu stands out as a man of courage and integrity. His refusal to flee, his commitment to the process, and his unwavering belief in democracy make him a true hero of Nigeria’s political history.
It is time Nigeria acknowledges his contributions, not as a scapegoat, but as a patriot who did his best under incredibly difficult circumstances.
