By Jibrin Adamu
In a dramatic turn of events on Nigeria’s Democracy Day, elder statesman and 1999 presidential candidate Chief Olu Falae has alleged that the results of the country’s historic transition election were rigged to install former military head of state Olusegun Obasanjo as a civilian president.
Speaking on The Morning Show aired by Arise TV, Falae — who ran under a joint platform of the Alliance for Democracy (AD) and the All Peoples Party (APP) — claimed that he was the legitimate winner of the February 27, 1999 presidential election.
According to him, a post-election analysis led by his late legal counsel, Chief J.O.K. Ajayi, showed that he won by more than one million votes.
“Chief Ajayi carefully analyzed the official figures and pointed out the disparities. From his findings, I should have been declared the winner,” Falae said.
The 1999 elections were viewed globally as a milestone in Nigeria’s return to democratic rule after years of brutal military regimes. Obasanjo, running under the newly formed Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), was seen by many — both domestically and internationally as a bridge between the military past and a democratic future.
Commission (INEC) gave Obasanjo about 18.7 million votes against Falae’s 11.1 million, a decisive margin that seemed to mark a national consensus. But Falae’s claims now challenge that narrative.
The former Finance Minister and former Secretary to the Government of the Federation (SGF) hinted that powerful interests within the military and political elite were determined to install Obasanjo, regardless of the actual votes cast.
“There was a decision made, somewhere beyond public scrutiny, that Obasanjo must be president and the rest is what you now see as history,” he added during the interview.
Falae noted that though he considered challenging the result legally, he was dissuaded by his party and advisers, who feared that a drawn-out legal battle would destabilize the fragile democratic process. At the time, Nigerians were more eager for civilian governance than electoral justice, he said.
The implications of Falae’s comments, though emerging more than two decades after the fact, have added a new layer to Nigeria’s complex democratic evolution. Analysts are already debating what it means for the country’s political memory and how it reflects on the transparency of the 1999 process — often romanticized as a clean break from military rule.
Political reactions have been swift and divided. While some see Falae’s claim as a long-overdue exposé, others dismiss it as revisionist history. Civil society activists argue that his remarks highlight the long-standing structural weaknesses of Nigeria’s electoral institutions, which remain vulnerable to elite interference.
Dr. Aisha Akinyemi, a political science lecturer at the University of Lagos, said: “Even if the claim cannot be legally pursued today, it forces us to confront uncomfortable truths about how Nigeria’s Fourth Republic began. If the foundation was compromised, it explains the cracks we still see today.”
Meanwhile, members of the PDP and allies of former President Obasanjo have declined to offer an official response, though a source close to the former president described Falae’s statement as “conveniently timed and factually ungrounded.”
Falae’s claims come at a time of increasing public distrust in Nigeria’s electoral system. From allegations of vote-buying to controversial tribunal judgments, many citizens believe elections remain vulnerable to elite manipulation — just as they may have been in 1999.
For Falae, the truth is not just personal
