Stating it categorically clear, paedophile Muhammadu Buhari should be facing trial for committing hijacking and dethroning a democratic government on December 1983. I have been concerned with tracking democracy’s advances and setbacks around the world and in the course of this, I decided to beam my searchlights on the contraption called Nigeria which used to be my country, by amalgamation. Since the return to civil democratic rule in 1999. It is, however, surprising that criminals who overthrew civilian governments and dissolved democratic structures in our part of the globe often come back to parade themselves as ‘democrats’ vying for elective posts and sometimes aspire to occupy the highest office in the land.
Tracing the viewpoints and opinions expressed over the years suggests how evaluations of and sentiments about the state of democracy have evolved since 1999 in Nigeria. For starters, as democracy experiences a remarkable worldwide resurgence with the Africa’s biggest economy getting deep involved in the past 15 years, the question is: have we lagged behind other democracies around the world in political ideas and organisation? These are one of the issues that agitate me terribly.
It stands to reason that anything goes in Nigeria, criminals are celebrated even the ones that have committed crimes that attract capital forfeit. What is the rationale behind Buhari’s comeback this time in civilian garb to contest the highest office in the land when he ought to have stood trial for sacking a civilian regime sometimes in 1983 via coup de tat that had our sovereign wishes annulled and eventually bastardised? He went scot free without being called upon to answer for his culpable misdeeds. In the USA, for instance, ex-servicemen often are envied for elective posts. This is normal and such men are often praised for their firm resolve to serve their country in different capacities. They did not commit this crime for which we call for Buhari’s immediate arrest and criminal prosecution. These are men who mean well for their country, but the reverse is the case in the contraption called Nigeria.
To mastermind or take part in a violent, sudden and illegal seizure of power from an elected government is a serious crime and in most cases it is a crime that carries the death penalty and this was a crime Buhari committed on December 31, 1983, for which he ought to have stood trial and possibly sent to the guillotine had that coup de tat failed. Mamman Vatsa committed a similar crime that cost his life under the erstwhile dictator Gen. Ibrahim Babangida. Could that violent seizure that took place at the tail end of 1983 not qualify as a capital crime in a country that democracy has gained enormous ground on international legitimacy? Nigerian democracy is more than fifteen years old today, and that is quite a number! The world must awake must be put to notice on the fact that multilateral organisations are increasingly endorsing democratic principles, and a whole new field of international democracy assistance has emerged.
Biafran tone have grown far more downbeat, and what we see here is none other than a darkening mood among supporters of democracy. Democracy-building must tenaciously be guarded against eventual descent to authoritarianism which Mr Buhari represents. Otherwise, he could never be a Democrat, not by any stretch of the imagination! But today, Buhari is holding a man only for speaking the truth, a man that only aimed at liberating his people. A man that did not even killed or planned to kill. However, I feel compelled to confront head-on the question of whether democracy is in decline in Nigeria. Is Nigeria among the world liberal democracies? What is the situation like on such liberal-democratic features as freedom of the press, the rule of law, freedom of speech and movements? And the like? Buhari and his cabal are on the verge of repeating what he did in 1967-70, where millions of Biafrans were killed irrespective of age, in collaboration with a tiny plot following an ill-conceived plan to bounce on innocent citizens who requested only for their freedom.
Mazi Nnamdi Kanu, the leader of The Indigenous People Of Biafra, has been charged with treason even if he is not a Nigerian. How can a foreigner, who has never indulged in any political position in Nigeria become guilty of treason? I understand, that the federal republic of Nigeria is led by an illiterate, who knew nothing about self-determination. With the above illustrations, let us call a spade a spade, who among these two, (Mazi Nnamdi Kanu and Muhammadu Buhari) should be facing trial? It's just so funny that a criminal could be calling someone else criminal, even when his criminality is viral. We have sounded it clear, and will always do so until our leader is finally free. #FREE NNAMDI KANU, #FREE BIAFRA.

Emmanuel Precious
Editor Udeagha Obasi
UmuChiukwu Writers.
Share To:



0 comments so far,add yours