The Presidency has slammed former Jigawa State Governor, Sule Lamido, for accusing President Bola Tinubu of supporting the annulment of the June 12, 1993 election, branding the claims as “false, revisionist, and shameful.”
In a fiery statement on Sunday, presidential spokesman Bayo Onanuga accused Lamido of distorting history for political gain, and described his comments on Arise TV as an attempt to “rewrite Nigeria’s democratic struggle with lies.”
Lamido had claimed Tinubu was aligned with General Ibrahim Babangida, who annulled the freest and fairest election in Nigeria’s history. But the Presidency hit back, pointing to Tinubu’s Senate speech on August 19, 1993, where he condemned the annulment as a “civilian coup” and called for nationwide resistance.
“The annulment of June 12 is another coup d’état… When will we stop tolerating injustice and abuse from those we empowered?” Tinubu reportedly asked on the Senate floor.
The statement also defended Tinubu’s late mother, Alhaja Abibatu Mogaji, refuting Lamido’s claim that she mobilised market women in support of the annulment. “Had she done that, she would have lost her position as Lagos market leader,” it stated.
Going further, the Presidency accused Lamido, then SDP National Secretary, and party chairman Tony Anenih, of betraying MKO Abiola by capitulating to military pressure instead of fighting for the people’s mandate.
“Lamido and his likes surrendered while Tinubu stood firm, funded resistance, joined NADECO, and paid the price—including exile and persecution,” the statement read.
The presidency also reminded Nigerians of Tinubu’s contributions in exile, where he supported the National Democratic Coalition (NADECO) and funded pro-democracy actions, while Lamido “struck deals with Abacha.”
Calling Lamido’s remarks “the rant of the disgruntled,” the statement accused him of suffering from “tall poppy syndrome”—resentment towards Tinubu’s rising democratic stature.
“It’s disappointing that Lamido—who admitted Tinubu’s role in NADECO—would try to diminish that legacy. History cannot be rewritten to suit envy,” the presidency warned.
The rebuttal closed with a stern message: Tinubu’s role in the June 12 struggle is well documented, and attempts to diminish it will fail.
