Last Friday, July 12, brought an end to
one of the most celebrated and longest running murder cases in the
country. On that day, Justice Rita Pemu, reading the unanimous decision
of the three-woman panel of the Appeal Court sitting in Lagos,
discharged and acquitted Major Hamza al-Mustapha of the charge that he
conspired to murder Alhaja Kudirat Abiola in Lagos on June 4, 1996.
Kudirat was the wife of Chief M. K. O. Abiola, the putative winner of
the annulled 1993 presidential election.
Predictably, the verdict has divided
Nigerians right down the middle along regional, if not sectarian, lines;
whereas most Northerners seemed to see the verdict as the vindication
of a long persecuted hero, most South-Westerners seemed to see it as the
untenable exoneration of a certified villain.
This division was clearly reflected, on
the one hand, by the hero’s welcome the major received in Kano, his
adopted state – he is originally from Yobe – and, on the other hand, by
the rejection of the verdict by Afenifere, the Yoruba umbrella cultural
organisation and by the Gani Adams faction of the Odua Peoples Congress,
the leading Yoruba militia. (It must be noted here that Dr. Fredrick
Fasehun who leads the other faction, and who indeed claims to be its
original founder, has not only consistently said he believed in the
innocence of al-Mustapha. He has vigorously campaigned for his release
from prison.)
al-Mustapha’s plight started on October
21, 1998, when he and several other officers were arrested on suspicion
that they were in illegal possession of arms, among other allegations.
This was barely four months after the sudden and mysterious death in
June of Head of State, General Sani Abacha, whose chief security officer
he was. He was to remain in jail for nearly 15 years charged, along
with others, with various crimes, including complicity in the murder of
Kudirat and Chief Alfred Rewane, a chieftain of the anti-Abacha
crusaders who was killed in October 1995, and of Major-General Shehu
Musa Yar’Adua who died in prison in 1997, accused of attempting to
overthrow Abacha.
The major was also charged, again along
with others, with the attempted murder of Mr Alex Ibru, the late
publisher of The Guardian and Abacha’s internal affairs minister, and
the attempted murder of Senator Abraham Adesanya, the leader of
Afenifere. In time he was also charged in 2004 with an attempt to
overthrow the elected government of President Olusegun Obasanjo even
while still in detention.
If all this looked like too much to
charge one man with it was mainly because the man ingeniously painted
himself in the image of an officer whose only crime was to have carried
out his duties to his principal to the best of his ability and in the
process to have secured the integrity and security of the country.
For one year after he was first picked
up, al-Mustapha remained in detention without trial. In October 1999,
five months after Obasanjo was sworn in as civilian president, he sued
the government for the violation of his human rights. The courts agreed
and said he should be released. The government ignored the order.
Instead al-Mustapha was charged with several murders and attempted
murders including, ironically, that of Senator Adesanya who, along with
several Afenifere chieftains, including Chiefs Ganiyu Dawodu and Ayo
Adebanjo had been charged by the Abacha regime for the murder of
Kudirat!
The clever intelligence officer that he
was, al-Mustapha chose to blame his predicament not on the government
that chose to prosecute him. Instead he chose to blame the government of
General Abubakar Abdulsalami that first detained him. The former head
of state, he said, wanted him out of circulation because the general
knew he knew both Abacha and Abiola did not die naturally but were
murdered and he also knew how allegedly complicit the general was in the
deaths of the two, the first in June and the second the following
month.
If his choice of who to blame for his
predicament and of the platform to make the allegation – the Oputa panel
set up by Obasanjo in 1999 but which began its hearing in 2000 on
abuses of human rights in the country since 1979 – was to create a
diversion from the charges he was facing, he succeeded beyond his
wildest imagination. Suddenly public attention shifted from his many
alleged abuses of power, as probably the most powerful chief security
officer of a head of state Nigeria has ever seen, to the alleged crimes
of General Abubakar.
One newspaper that seemed to have
captured the shift in public mood was the defunct The Comet. In an
editorial on December 4, 2000 aptly entitled “al-Mustapha: Let the
‘canary’ sing publicly,” following al-Mustapha testimony before Oputa,
the newspaper said “Nigerians deserve to hear everything from
al-Mustapha since he has himself, under oath promised to tell the truth
and nothing but the truth. He should be allowed to tell his version of
the events and if he incriminates anybody or groups of persons, they too
should have their days at the Oputa Commission.”
It then concluded that al-Mustapha must
be given maximum protection to tell his story in public. It took the
major about 12 years to retell his story in public. This was in August
2011 when himself and his co-defendant, Lateef Sofolahan, said to be an
aide to Kudirat, testified before a Lagos State High Court sitting in
Igbosere to their innocence in her murder. On this occasion not only did
he repeat his allegation of being persecuted for what he knew, he also
added a new claim that the chieftains of Afenifere had been heavily
bribed into silence by General Abubakar over the death of Abiola.
Predictably the same media that had
hailed him over his accusation against General Abubakar turned
completely round to condemn him as an inveterate liar.
In between Oputa in 2000 and the
Igboshere High Court, himself and his co-defendants in other murder
cases, namely General Ishaya Bamaiyi, a former army chief, James
Danbaba, a former commissioner of police, Colonel Jibril Bala Yakubu, a
former Zamfara State military administrator and Rabo Lawal, head of the
Aso Rock Villa anti-riot squad, were cleared of all the other charges.
He and Sofolahan were, however, left to face the charge of murdering
Kudirat. Their case was re-opened in July 2011.
Following their August testimonies, the
trial judge, Justice Mojisola Dada, adjourned the case to November for
counsels to both sides to submit their written addresses after she had
rejected their position that they had no case to answer. At the November
hearing she fixed January 30 for judgment. On that day she found them
both guilty and sentenced them to death by hanging. To rub it in even
more she had very unkind words to say to each of them. al-Mustapha, she
said in effect, was a ruthless enforcer for his principal who “felt
obliged to silence any voice against the government of his boss” and
felt he was “untouchable.” As for Sofolahan he was, she said, “a gold
digger, a Judas Iscariot, who sold his master.”
Predictably there was much rejoicing in the Southwest and much gloom in the North.
Equally predictably al-Mustapha appealed.
Last Friday, the Appeal Court overturned Justice Dada’s verdict. “There
is no evidence,” Justice Pemu reading the court’s judgement said, “that
the appellants conspired to murder Kudirat…There is even nothing to
show that the appellants had the intention to murder the deceased.”
The court’s grounds for overturning the
Lagos State High Court’s verdicts seemed unassailable. First, the
prosecution said it would bring a dozen witnesses against the accused.
It brought only four. Second, the testimonies of the two key witnesses
were not only contradictory, the two were to later recant their
statements because they said they had been bribed and threatened at the
same time to testify against the accused. Third, the bullet the
prosecution claimed had been extracted from Kudirat’s head was never
tendered as exhibit as the prosecution had promised.
Predictably last Friday’s judgement saw a
reversal of roles between al-Mustapha’s sympathisers and those who
disliked him. It also left many questions unanswered not least of which
is, so who killed Kudirat?
We may never know the answer. However,
what we do know for certain is that vindication or not, al-Mustapha will
remain a hero for some and a villain for others. In between there are
probably many more who don’t give a damn either way right now.
It is the opinion of these that
al-Mustapha should worry about as he begins a new life after so many
years in prison. If, as he said in a BBC Hausa interview last Saturday,
he has truly learnt his lesson about “how some people use the judiciary
and power against the poor” – a charge he knows all too well he cannot
escape as the most powerful chief security officer of a head of state
this country has seen – and if, as he also said, he had come to
understand his religion well, he is likely to get the sympathy of such
people.
One can only hope that he will not, like
many a born-again Muslim or Christian, revert true to type as soon as he
gets another opportunity to be in power- something which is not
unlikely, especially in a country like ours where public memory is ever
so short.
No comments:
Post a Comment