A new twist has been introduced to the allegation of bribery levelled against Yoruba leaders who visited Gen. Abdusalami Abubakar immediately after the death of the acclaimed winner of June 12 presidential election, Chief Moshood Abiola, in 1998.



Founder and leader of Oodua Peoples Congress (OPC), Dr. Frederick Fasehun, disclosed that at a meeting held in London, at the instance of NADECO, it was agreed that they would have nothing to do with the new military administration of General Abubakar, except to hold a Sovereign National Conference.

Fasehun confirmed that the delegation to General Abubakar was led by the late Chief Abraham Adesanya, who he described as a “super leader of the Yoruba and NADECO.”

He called on Nigerians to prevail on the Federal Government to set up a high-powered commission of enquiry to look into the allegation. According to him, such enquiry would either exonerate those involved or indict them and Nigerians would know the truth about the allegation if investigated.

Fasehun is unhappy that Major Hamza Al-Mustapha has remained in detention for more than 12 years. According to him, 12 years is equal to 20 prison calendar years, while describing Al-Mustapha’s trial as moving from a legal trial to a political trial.

He called for his unconditional release or else the nation may pay dearly for unjustly incarcerating a man, who has held a very sensitive position in the past.

What is your position on the allegation of bribery levelled against Yoruba leaders by Al-Mustapha, former Chief Security Officer (CSO) to the late Gen. Sani Abacha?

My own position is that the Yoruba people must prevail strongly on the Federal Government to set up a high-powered commission of enquiry to unearth the truth on this allegation. It can achieve two purposes. It can either condemn the Yoruba leaders, if they took part in such a thing and it can also clear them or make them the pride of this nation and the pride of Yoruba people. I went to prison to visit some prisoners and they told me that Al-Mustapha was around. I said I would like to meet him and we met and resumed our old friendship. I have kept that on since then. He told me a few things about this country, about leaders – both military and civilian and when I feel the information was very sensitive, I told him to keep it to himself so that he will not throw this country ablaze. That is why I am saying that we should not politicise Al-Mustapha’s trial. It was a legal thing. But we have succeeded in politicising it. So, now, the only option for Nigeria is to set him free. If we don’t set him free because we think he is a bad person who should be paid back in his own coin, the country may not enjoy the consequence. To enjoy the country, we need peace, tranquility and security. Somebody who was in such a sensitive position, you don’t treat him like that.

I am not saying that anybody who offends the law of the land should not be punished. I am saying that the law of the land has failed in 13 calendar years, which is 20 prison years, to decide either way. He is an embarrassment, not to the prisoners but to the country that is singing democracy, social justice and rule of law. It has become an embarrassment to democracy, to the country and super embarrassment to the judicial system.

But only the court can set him free.

So, why have they reneged for 20 years?

It is said that he appealed and sought several adjournments.

This is the information journalists push out to us. I have been in court during the trial a few times when the prosecutor would ask for adjournment. I have been following it up. Do you think a sane mind would want to stay in prison rather than with his family, his work, his contacts and his friends? I don’t think so. But we have been fed with that type of information and we seem to have swallowed it. Now, you mean no judge has been able to say: “No, this matter has been going on for too long. We must give judgment.” They have turned it into a political matter rather than a legal one. He was accused with nine others and one of the charges he is now facing is conspiracy to murder and they mean murder of Kudirat Abiola. Those who were supposed to have committed the offence with him have since been left off the hook. Does one man conspire with himself? That is why I said it has moved from being a legal issue to a political one.

Did Al-Mustapha tell you how Yoruba leaders were bribed to scuttle June 12?

He told me that some NADECO leaders came to Aso Rock. He did not tell me that Yoruba leaders were given money. No government gives money like that. So, it doesn’t matter what the videotape shows. No government will carry bags of money to you. If they want to spoil you, as it were, they will send their emissaries to you in your hotel. But do not forget that we have found in the homes of some of our leaders in this nation currency loaded in water tanks in under ground places.

Did that happen recently?

I said we have discovered that in this country, we should not be emotional about this thing. The truth is the truth and the truth must be told, especially where somebody, a fellow citizen is suffering unnecessarily. What type of punishment are you going to give him now? Are you going to sentence him to death after spending 20 years in prison? Or, are you going to sentence him for an offence allegedly committed in conspiracy with others who were set free? That is why I say we are in democracy and democracy is tantamount to social justice, rule of law and fairness to all. Are we doing justice to somebody we have imprisoned for 20 years without being convicted. That is my position. I am saying that the Yoruba people are not that wicked. That is why we call ourselves omo luabi. We are very forgiving. But I don’t think anybody who visited Aso Rock two days after Abiola’s death, unless he was paying a condolence visit to Abdusalami has anything reasonable to say to this nation.

What exactly are you saying? NADECO leaders paid General Abubakar a courtesy visit. Other leaders from other parts of the country also paid such courtesy visits. Are you saying it is not right?

I am saying it is not right. I was one of the NADECO leaders and I was present at the meeting in London when we objected to visiting Abdulsalami. How did the visit of a few people become an official mission?

You are one of the prominent leaders of NADECO. Did you, in the first place, recognise Adesanya as leader of Afenifere and NADECO?

The integrity of Papa Adesanya is unassailable, dead or alive. I recognise him as a super leader of the Yoruba people. He had no skeleton in his cupboard.

I asked the question because Adesanya led the delegation to Aso Rock.

I said we were in London when that particular issue was discussed.

Was that after Abiola’s death?

Yes. We took a position that we would not participate in any government that emanated without sitting down at a Sovereign National Conference to re-order the nation.

Was that the decision of NADECO abroad?

Not NADECO abroad. I was not a member of the NADECO abroad. I did not go on exile.

Does that mean all NADECO leaders, such as Adesanya, Ige, Falae and others that did not go on exile attended the meeting?

It was NADECO abroad that invited us to the meeting in London. Many of them are still living. The nation was in a state of flux at that time and nobody knew what the future held for Nigeria. But NADECO was interested in the continuity of Nigeria. Now, we seem to be approaching issues with unnecessary sentiment. Truth is always the truth. It is constant. For posterity and for the sake of proper history, let the present be informed.

If that was the collective decision of NADECO leaders, why should Adesanya lead a delegation to Aso Rock? Also, your members took part in the election he conducted.

We decided that we would not paticipate in anything short of the sovereign national conference. You must be able to answer if the decision to contest emanated from NADECO platform or individual platform. People came to say that if we did not participate, the government would go on anyway. So, let us be part of them. Nobody was better qualified than Papa Enahoro joining that government. But he stayed out and expressed some frustration. When people came back from this official assignment, to whom did they give the report? If NADECO sent people on errand, NADECO should expect the report from that assignment. To whom did they give the report? Was it written or verbal? Was it implied? The truth must be told. I do not believe in telling lies.

From what you have said, it seems there was disagreement within NADECO on your approach to the Abdusalami transition programme.

NADECO never agreed with the military government. At one point, we sent some feelers that may be the government will agree to government of national unity. That did not come to be. The sovereign national conference we agitated for did not come to be. Yet, our members became members of the government.

Are you saying that NADECO did not send Adesanya and those who went to Aso Rock on errand? Or perhaps, they did not go there to represent NADECO?

No. I will not go that far because the leader of NADECO was part of that delegation. But I am saying that NADECO did not commit itself by visiting Abdusalami at that time. Secondly, NADECO was still mourning the symbol of democracy and the symbol of June 12 for which many of us suffered. It was too early to forget the suffering of those days. Look at what that visit has introduced into a race. People have been accusing us now that NADECO leaders went to take money. We became so confused about the issue that some of us thought Al-Mustapha said Yoruba leaders. He did not say Yoruba leaders. He said NADECO leaders. There is a popular proverb in Yoruba land that when the family is eating, every member of the family knows the meat that is due to him or her. If you viewed Al-Mustapha’s tape, you will know the truth. I watched the videotape played in court and there was nothing like that.