Dele Giwa Murder: Ray Ekpu Rejects Babangida’s Explanation, Demands Answers 40 Years After Assassination

By CentralNewsNG News Desk | November 4, 2026

Veteran Nigerian journalist and co-founder of Newswatch magazine, Ray Ekpu, has rejected former military president Ibrahim Badamasi Babangida’s explanation for his administration’s failure to resolve the assassination of renowned journalist Dele Giwa.

Ekpu described Babangida’s account as unacceptable, questioning why the military government failed to identify and prosecute those responsible for the killing despite the attention the case attracted.

The veteran journalist expressed his position in an article titled Dele Giwa’s Assassination: More Questions Than Answers (2), published on Tuesday, November 3, 2026.

His intervention followed Babangida’s explanation in his autobiography, A Journey in Service, released in February 2025.

Giwa, the founding Editor-in-Chief of Newswatch magazine, was killed by a parcel bomb at his residence in Ikeja, Lagos State, on October 19, 1986.

The assassination remains one of Nigeria’s most prominent unresolved criminal cases, with no conviction secured four decades after the incident.

Ekpu Questions Babangida’s Explanation

Ekpu challenged Babangida’s argument that political hostility towards his military administration complicated investigations into Giwa’s assassination.

In his memoir, Babangida maintained that the killing had been politicised by critics of his government and that public accusations against the authorities had affected the investigative atmosphere.

The former military leader also rejected suggestions that the parcel bomb originated from government circles.

However, Ekpu argued that the political controversy surrounding the incident should have strengthened the government’s determination to establish the truth rather than leave the case unresolved.

He questioned why an administration with extensive security and investigative powers could not bring the perpetrators to justice.

Ekpu also challenged Babangida’s decision to address the controversy in detail decades after the assassination.

His comments reflect continuing disagreements over the circumstances of Giwa’s death and the responsibility of the authorities who investigated it.

The Mystery Surrounding the Parcel Bomb

One of Ekpu’s central arguments concerns the appearance and markings of the parcel that killed Giwa.

According to his account, Giwa had previously received correspondence associated with Babangida’s office, bearing official-looking inscriptions and a particular style of addressing the journalist.

Ekpu said he had personally seen one such letter when Giwa invited him to assist in drafting a speech intended for Babangida.

He argued that whoever prepared the deadly parcel appeared familiar with the format of correspondence previously received by Giwa.

Ekpu also recalled that the parcel was marked for the attention of its intended recipient.

According to him, Giwa’s son, Billy, saw the writing on the package before handing it to his father.

The veteran journalist suggested that these circumstances raised questions that Babangida’s explanation had not adequately addressed.

However, the similarity alleged by Ekpu does not, by itself, establish who prepared or delivered the explosive device.

The identity of the perpetrators remains unresolved.

Babangida Denies Involvement in Giwa’s Death

In his autobiography, Babangida denied responsibility for the assassination and described Giwa as a personal friend whose views on national affairs he respected.

The former military president said he was shocked by the killing and regarded it as a tragedy that affected both the journalism profession and the country.

He also questioned why anyone planning an assassination on behalf of the government would leave markings on a parcel that appeared to point towards official involvement.

Babangida argued that the public atmosphere following the killing became deeply confrontational, making the investigation more difficult.

He maintained that accusations directed at his administration were made before the evidence had been conclusively established.

The former military leader also expressed hope that the truth about Giwa’s death would eventually emerge.

His position differs sharply from Ekpu’s interpretation of the circumstances surrounding the killing.

No judicial finding cited in the latest reports establishes Babangida’s personal responsibility for the assassination.

Ekpu Raises Questions About Security Officials

Beyond the parcel’s appearance, Ekpu revisited the activities of security officials who had interacted with Giwa shortly before his death.

He recalled that Colonel A. K. Togun questioned the journalist about several matters in the days preceding the assassination.

According to Ekpu, one of those questions concerned a telephone discussion between him and Giwa about police officer Alozie Ogugbuaja.

Ekpu alleged that the authorities had monitored their telephone conversations, raising concerns about how security officials obtained information about their discussions.

He also referred to Brigadier Halilu Akilu, whom he said contacted Giwa’s wife, Funmi, shortly before the assassination.

According to Ekpu’s account, Akilu requested the family’s residential address and indicated that he intended to visit.

Ekpu questioned the circumstances of that contact and why the proposed visit did not take place.

These claims form part of Ekpu’s longstanding concerns about the investigation.

They remain allegations and disputed historical accounts rather than proof that any named official carried out the assassination.

What Happened During the Oputa Panel Investigation?

Ekpu also referred to developments during the Human Rights Violations Investigation Commission, commonly known as the Oputa Panel, established under former President Olusegun Obasanjo.

The panel examined allegations of human rights abuses committed during previous Nigerian administrations.

According to Ekpu, former police investigator Abubakar Tsav told the panel in July 2001 that he had sought permission to question security officials in connection with Giwa’s assassination.

Ekpu said Tsav reported that he was not permitted to interrogate Akilu and Togun.

The journalist further claimed that the investigation encountered obstacles after the case file was submitted to senior police authorities.

He also criticised legal action taken by individuals seeking to prevent their appearance before the panel.

For Ekpu, these developments raised additional questions about whether investigators were given sufficient freedom to pursue the case.

However, the decision to challenge a panel’s authority through the courts does not, on its own, establish criminal guilt.

Gani Fawehinmi’s Efforts to Pursue Justice

The late human rights lawyer and Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Gani Fawehinmi, played a significant role in efforts to secure accountability for Giwa’s killing.

Fawehinmi pursued legal proceedings seeking to advance the investigation and prosecute those he believed should face questioning over the assassination.

The case became an important part of his wider campaign for accountability, human rights and the rule of law.

Ekpu recalled the difficulties Fawehinmi encountered while pursuing the matter.

He alleged that the lawyer faced intimidation and institutional resistance during his efforts to obtain justice.

Despite years of legal controversy and public pressure, the assassination did not result in a successful murder prosecution.

The unresolved case continues to raise questions about investigative independence and accountability in politically sensitive criminal matters.

Why Dele Giwa’s Assassination Remains Significant

Dele Giwa was among the journalists who helped establish Newswatch magazine as an influential publication during Nigeria’s military era.

The magazine became known for political reporting, investigative journalism and commentary on national affairs.

Giwa’s killing attracted widespread attention because of the unusual method used and the circumstances surrounding his death.

It also intensified concerns about the safety of journalists working under military rule.

For Nigeria’s media community, the case remains an important reference point in discussions about press freedom, threats against journalists and the responsibility of government institutions to investigate attacks on media professionals.

The assassination occurred at a time when political criticism and national security matters were highly sensitive.

Four decades later, the absence of a conviction continues to shape public discussion about the case.

Ekpu Says Important Questions Remain Unanswered

Ekpu’s latest intervention is not an announcement of new criminal charges or a fresh judicial finding.

Rather, it is a renewed challenge to Babangida’s explanation and a restatement of questions Ekpu believes have never been satisfactorily answered.

His argument focuses on the conduct of the original investigation, the actions of security officials and the failure to bring anyone to justice.

Babangida, on the other hand, has consistently denied involvement and maintained that political accusations complicated efforts to establish the facts.

The competing accounts illustrate why the assassination remains controversial.

A conclusive resolution would require credible evidence, an independent investigation and appropriate judicial proceedings.

Until then, allegations about the identity of those responsible must be distinguished from established facts.

Forty Years Later, the Search for Answers Continues

Giwa’s assassination on October 19, 1986, marked a defining moment in Nigerian journalism.

As of November 2026, 40 years have passed since his death.

Ekpu’s renewed criticism demonstrates that questions surrounding the case have not disappeared, despite the passage of time and changes in political leadership.

For journalists, human rights advocates and members of the public, the unresolved killing remains a reminder of the importance of investigating attacks on media professionals and ensuring accountability through the justice system.

While Babangida has denied responsibility and expressed hope that the truth will eventually emerge, Ekpu insists that the explanations offered so far have not resolved the central questions surrounding his colleague’s death.

Sources: Ray Ekpu’s article published by TheNiche on November 3, 2026; ARISE News and THISDAY reports of November 4, 2026; TheCable and Punch reports on Babangida’s autobiography, February 2025.