A Professor of history and strategic studies, Nkem Onyekpe, has
advanced reasons former President Goodluck Jonathan would have
questioned and even annulled the presidential
election held in 2015.
Onyekpe categorically argued that as a then sitting president of
Nigeria, Jonathan had no fewer than five valid grounds upon which he
could have predicted an objection to the processes and outcomes of the
election, which both local and international communities, described as
a major test to the country’s fledgling democracy.
He, however, extolled Jonathan for accepting the
results of the election and also placed a telephone call across to
congratulate his major rival, General Muhammadu Buhari.
In a-47 page lecture entitled “The Anioma Nation and Democratic
Consolidation in Delta State,” the University of Lagos Professor
predicated his first argument on the suspicious creation of more
polling centres in the northern part of the country without a
commensurate establishment of such additional centres in the southern
divide of the country.
He maintained that when it was clear that voter’s cards were not
available for many registered voters in the strongholds of Jonathan in
the South South and South East geopolitical zones and “when the card
reader severally rejected him, his wife and his mother, the
ex-president could have taken actions that would have jeopardized the
electoral process.
Onyekpe, who spoke at Ejeme-Aniogor; Aniocha South Local Government
Area of Delta State, during the fourth biennial public lecture/grand
civic reception in honour of Governor Ifeanyi Okowa, averred that
Jonathan could have sounded the alarm when it became “obvious that
while the ‘educationally backward’ or ‘less developed’ states of the
North did not have or had only few voided votes, the ‘educational
highly developed’ states of the South had many voided votes.”
Onyekpe insisted that Jonathan could have towed the ignoble path of
annulling the 2015 presidential polls, ‘when his supporters cried foul
at the management of the presidential election by the electoral body,
the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC)” and other
agencies involved in the contest.
The professor said Jonathan was not an opportunist and, therefore,
refused to explore the advantage of his incumbency to the detriment of
the entire country.
“He did not tear his voter’s card! Instead, he pleaded with the entire
nation for understanding and cooperation with the INEC. He avoided the
Machiavellian path.
He chose, instead, the path of peace and honour.
“In good conscience, he listened to the inner voice of reason, wisdom,
and courage, and conceded victory to his major rival, General
Muhammadu Buhari, and congratulated him well before the conclusion of
the election.
“He could not as a president affords to preside over the violent
dismemberment of the Nigerian nation as ‘dog and baboon’ soak in
blood. It must be emphasized that within the limit of our knowledge,
this singular action of Goodluck Jonathan as President of Nigeria and
Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of the nation, was hitherto
unprecedented in world modern history”.
He called on leaders in the country to “imbibe the exemplary
transcendental pacificist spirit and attitude of Goodluck Jonathan,”
adding that Jonathan’s action should serve as a timely lesson for all
leaders.
No comments:
Write comments