ABUJA, Nigeria — The Nigerian presidency has issued an apology after mistakenly including two living pro-democracy figures, Reuben Fasoranti and Edwin Madunagu, in the list of posthumous national honourees during President Bola Tinubu’s Democracy Day address on Thursday, June 12, 2025.
The blunder, which sparked swift public reaction, came as President Tinubu conferred national honours on 66 individuals who played notable roles in Nigeria’s democratic struggle.
The Democracy Day speech was delivered before a joint sitting of the National Assembly in Abuja, commemorating 26 years of uninterrupted civil rule.
Among those rightly named for posthumous recognition were Shehu Musa Yar’Adua, Humphrey Nwosu, and Kudirat Abiola.
However, the inclusion of Fasoranti, a nonagenarian and leader of the Yoruba socio-political group Afenifere, and Madunagu, a respected author and mathematician, in the posthumous category, triggered immediate criticism on social media and within civil society.
In a statement later on Thursday, June 12, 2025, Bayo Onanuga, Special Adviser to the President on Information and Strategy, acknowledged the mistake, attributing it to a clerical error.
“Under the Posthumous Award category, the names of Pa Reuben Fasoranti, the Afenifere leader, and Dr Edwin Madunagu were incorrectly included,” Onanuga said.
“Both distinguished individuals are very much alive and, therefore, should not have appeared in the posthumous category.”
“We sincerely regret this oversight. We shall make the necessary corrections across all State House digital platforms,” he added.
The presidency did not indicate whether the two individuals would still receive honours under the correct category.
The mix-up drew swift responses online, with many Nigerians expressing disbelief that such a sensitive mistake could occur during a national address of symbolic importance.
“Errors like this speak volumes about attention to detail in matters of national significance,” said a political analyst in Abuja.
“It is not just a technical error — it reflects poorly on institutional rigour.”
