There was confusion on Sunday over two statements purportedly written by a former military dictator, Gen. Ibrahim Babangida, which bordered on the 201
There was confusion on Sunday over two statements purportedly written by a former military dictator, Gen. Ibrahim Babangida, which bordered on the 2019 elections, the herdsmen/farmers’ crisis and other issues plaguing the nation. In an earlier statement titled, ‘Towards a National Rebirth’ and signed by the Media Adviser to the former dictator, Prince Kassim Afegbua, IBB as the former Head of States is fondly called, advised Nigerians to do away with analogue leaders and embrace those of the digital age. He was quoted as saying that while President Muhammadu Buhari reserved the right to seek re-election in 2019, the time had come for Nigerians to unite behind a younger candidate.
However, in a statement issued hours later, IBB said the earlier statement was Kassim Afegbua’s personal opinion. He said he had unfettered access to Buhari and could therefore meet him in person without resorting to open letters. The statement read in part, “Let me categorically state that as a former President and statesman, I have unfettered access and channel of communication with the highest authorities in the country without necessarily going public with a sensational statement. Therefore, the views expressed in the alleged statement are not mine but the writer’s.”
But in a rather funny twist, Kassim Afegbua says he stands by the statement, insisting that he sat with the former dictator before he issued the statement. He said as one who had been doing the job for over 14 years, he could not issue such a statement without the permission of his principal. The spokesman said it was some overzealous people around Babangida that issued the rebuttal. Afegbua, however, said the former dictator had not withdrawn his statement.
According to him, “When the statement was sent and some of his friends saw the twist of the reportage on the social media and how they sensationalised it and all of that, taking away the kernel of the content of the statement, they felt that we were just trying to put the former President on a collision course with the present President and so to that extent, they went to write a statement to deny that but I have since spoken to him. He has called me to say that statement stands and the kernel of that statement should inform public discourse and not people necessarily personalising it as if it were against the sitting President.”
