Former Chief Security Officer to the late Head of State, General Sani Abacha, Major Hamza Al-Mustapha (retired), has firmly denied accusations from a former Department of State Services (DSS) operative about the circumstances of Abacha’s death, calling the claims false and misleading.
Responding to the statements by the retired DSS officer, Al-Mustapha asserted that the public narrative presented does not accurately reflect what happened during the final moments of the former military leader. He insisted that the account is speculative and lacks verified facts.
Al-Mustapha emphasized, “What he said is not true,” highlighting that he was one of the closest officials to General Abacha and was well-informed about the events leading to Abacha’s death on June 8, 1998.
He argued that Abacha’s death was sudden, and over the years, many conflicting stories have emerged, most of which, according to him, lack credible evidence. Al-Mustapha advised Nigerians to remain skeptical of unverified accounts that could distort the country’s history.
The controversy arose following remarks by the former DSS operative, who reportedly offered a different account of the events surrounding Abacha’s death, sparking renewed public debate over one of Nigeria’s most talked-about political moments.
General Abacha led Nigeria from 1993 until his death in 1998, a period characterized by economic reforms, international sanctions, and criticism over human rights issues. His unexpected passing led to General Abdulsalami Abubakar’s emergence, who initiated a transition program culminating in Nigeria’s return to democratic rule in 1999.
Political analysts suggest the recent exchange underscores the enduring public interest in Abacha’s death’s circumstances, nearly three decades later. They note that conflicting accounts from former government and security officials continue to fuel debate, although no official inquiry has changed the widely accepted view that Abacha died suddenly while in office.
As discussions persist, Al-Mustapha reiterated that historical events should be recorded based on verifiable facts rather than personal opinions and urged those familiar with past events to present evidence instead of speculation.
