Jonathan and the Debate Over a ‘Ceremonial Coup’ By HE Prof. Mrs. Zainab Abiola, mni
Recent developments in Guinea-Bissau have once again thrown the fragility of constitutional order in West Africa into sharp relief.
The Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) has suspended the country, confirming what regional diplomats describe as yet another rupture of democratic governance.
Political denials from former leaders may shape public opinion, but they do little to alter the institutional fact: Guinea-Bissau has experienced a coup.
As a Conflict Resolution Expert and author of The Revolutionary Potentials of the Nigerian Military, I have repeatedly warned that military takeovers in Africa spread like a contagion.
Guinea-Bissau’s crisis is the latest entry in a troubling and expanding list.
Africa is witnessing an escalation of military interventions unprecedented in recent decades.
Today the following nations are under military or transitional military authority:Mali, Burkina Faso, Niger, Guinea (Conakry), Chad, Sudan, Gabon, and Guinea-Bissau.
This pattern reinforces a long-held truth: coups prosper where democratic institutions are weak or manipulated.
No amount of international training programmes has succeeded in insulating the continent from this slide.
The continent has been here before.
In 1975, Nigeria’s Head of State, General Yakubu Gowon, was attending an Organisation of African Unity summit in Kampala when news reached him that he had been overthrown.
He telephoned home in disbelief, but his personal awareness could not reverse the fait accompli.
A coup, as history teaches, is defined by institutional disruption—not by whether the targeted leader anticipates it
The 2015 Nigerian presidential election introduced its own constitutional controversy.
Former President Goodluck Jonathan phoned his rival, General Muhammadu Buhari, to concede and effectively hand over power before the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) had completed collation or made an official announcement.
This premature concession, unprecedented on the continent, raised far-reaching political and legal questions.
It placed INEC’s independence and neutrality in doubt, short-circuited laid-down constitutional procedure, created an unsettling precedent of institutional vulnerability.
Jonathan’s foreknowledge of the election outcome before INEC’s official declaration invites further scrutiny.
If the electoral umpire furnished results ahead of schedule, that would constitute interference in the people’s sovereign mandate.
More personally, his unilateral decision also touched on deeper systemic issues.
His appropriation of my Presidential Nomination Form 001 to declare himself sole candidate reflected an entrenched pattern of political exclusion, including against women.
Jonathan’s recent public criticisms of President Umaro Sissoco Embaló of Guinea-Bissau underscore a broader concern: the behaviour of former presidents can influence regional stability.
Under the African Peer Review Mechanism (APRM), Article 3 requires leaders to maintain objectivity, respect sovereignty, and avoid inciting or prejudicial statements—especially during crises.
Irresponsible commentary from a former Nigerian president risks misinterpretation abroad, with potential to inflame hostility or xenophobia toward Nigerian citizens.
Statesmanship demands restraint, precision, and a commitment to safeguarding national dignity.
African democracies depend on election observers who exhibit integrity, neutrality, and courage.
Nigeria must ensure that those representing the nation abroad do not undermine democratic processes or retreat when firm leadership is required.
The continent deserves observers whose presence strengthens, rather than destabilises, electoral credibility.
Guinea-Bissau’s crisis is not an isolated incident but part of a widening fault line across the region.
To arrest the spread of unconstitutional power grabs, Africa needs: robust and resilient democratic institutions, regional mechanisms grounded in discipline and objectivity, leaders guided by principle rather than political expediency, an uncompromising commitment to constitutional rule
Africa now stands at a crucial crossroads.
The choices made by its leaders in this moment will shape the continent’s democratic trajectory for a generation.
Only leadership anchored in integrity and courage can restore confidence and protect the continent’s credibility on the global stage.
HE Prof. Mrs. Zainab Abiola, mni.
For media enquiries:
Email: Junomoneta4@gmail.com
Jonathan and the Debate Over a ‘Ceremonial Coup’
By HE Prof. Mrs. Zainab Abiola, mni
Recent developments in Guinea-Bissau have once again thrown the fragility of constitutional order in West Africa into sharp relief.
The Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) has suspended the country, confirming what regional diplomats describe as yet another rupture of democratic governance.
Political denials from former leaders may shape public opinion, but they do little to alter the institutional fact: Guinea-Bissau has experienced a coup.
As a Conflict Resolution Expert and author of The Revolutionary Potentials of the Nigerian Military, I have repeatedly warned that military takeovers in Africa spread like a contagion.
Guinea-Bissau’s crisis is the latest entry in a troubling and expanding list.
Africa is witnessing an escalation of military interventions unprecedented in recent decades.
Today the following nations are under military or transitional military authority:Mali, Burkina Faso, Niger, Guinea (Conakry), Chad, Sudan, Gabon, and Guinea-Bissau.
This pattern reinforces a long-held truth: coups prosper where democratic institutions are weak or manipulated.
No amount of international training programmes has succeeded in insulating the continent from this slide.
The continent has been here before.
In 1975, Nigeria’s Head of State, General Yakubu Gowon, was attending an Organisation of African Unity summit in Kampala when news reached him that he had been overthrown.
He telephoned home in disbelief, but his personal awareness could not reverse the fait accompli.
A coup, as history teaches, is defined by institutional disruption—not by whether the targeted leader anticipates it
The 2015 Nigerian presidential election introduced its own constitutional controversy.
Former President Goodluck Jonathan phoned his rival, General Muhammadu Buhari, to concede and effectively hand over power before the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) had completed collation or made an official announcement.
This premature concession, unprecedented on the continent, raised far-reaching political and legal questions.
It placed INEC’s independence and neutrality in doubt, short-circuited laid-down constitutional procedure, created an unsettling precedent of institutional vulnerability.
Jonathan’s foreknowledge of the election outcome before INEC’s official declaration invites further scrutiny.
If the electoral umpire furnished results ahead of schedule, that would constitute interference in the people’s sovereign mandate.
More personally, his unilateral decision also touched on deeper systemic issues.
His appropriation of my Presidential Nomination Form 001 to declare himself sole candidate reflected an entrenched pattern of political exclusion, including against women.
Jonathan’s recent public criticisms of President Umaro Sissoco Embaló of Guinea-Bissau underscore a broader concern: the behaviour of former presidents can influence regional stability.
Under the African Peer Review Mechanism (APRM), Article 3 requires leaders to maintain objectivity, respect sovereignty, and avoid inciting or prejudicial statements—especially during crises.
Irresponsible commentary from a former Nigerian president risks misinterpretation abroad, with potential to inflame hostility or xenophobia toward Nigerian citizens.
Statesmanship demands restraint, precision, and a commitment to safeguarding national dignity.
African democracies depend on election observers who exhibit integrity, neutrality, and courage.
Nigeria must ensure that those representing the nation abroad do not undermine democratic processes or retreat when firm leadership is required.
The continent deserves observers whose presence strengthens, rather than destabilises, electoral credibility.
Guinea-Bissau’s crisis is not an isolated incident but part of a widening fault line across the region.
To arrest the spread of unconstitutional power grabs, Africa needs: robust and resilient democratic institutions, regional mechanisms grounded in discipline and objectivity, leaders guided by principle rather than political expediency, an uncompromising commitment to constitutional rule
Africa now stands at a crucial crossroads.
The choices made by its leaders in this moment will shape the continent’s democratic trajectory for a generation.
Only leadership anchored in integrity and courage can restore confidence and protect the continent’s credibility on the global stage.
HE Prof. Mrs. Zainab Abiola, mni.
For media enquiries:
Email: Junomoneta4@gmail.com
