THE first death brought hope, the second despair and violence. A month after the death of General Sani Abacha, the dictator who dominated Nigeria for nearly five years, Chief Moshood Abiola, the imprisoned (undeclared) winner of the 1993 presidential election, died on July 7th. Both are said to have died of heart attacks.

Chief Abiola died on the eve of his expected release from prison. He was discussing terms for this release with visiting American officials when he began to cough and breathe heavily, and then collapsed with an apparent heart attack. He was pronounced dead on arrival at a clinic. The Americans said they did not suspect foul play. But, in the face of swelling suspicion, there is to be an independent autopsy.

Shock quickly turned to anger among his supporters, the Yoruba people of south-west Nigeria. Accusing the military government of murder, hundreds took to the streets. Northerners and northern-owned properties were attacked. In the first couple of days after his death, 19 deaths were confirmed from the violence in Lagos, Ibadan and Abeokuta, the chief's home town. As the country braced itself for revenge attacks on southerners in the north, a crisis was in the making.

The chief's supporters were already angry at what they saw as foreign interference. Although neither they nor his family had been allowed access to Mr Abiola, last week Kofi Annan, the UN secretary-general, and others were able to visit him in prison. Mr Annan and Emeka Anyaoku, the Commonwealth secretary-general, are on record as saying they did not favour retrospective recognition of the 1993 election. In his talks with them, Mr Abiola apparently hinted that he would be content to become a private citizen again and not claim his right to be president. He would not, however, confirm this in writing until he had consulted his supporters—who certainly would not have agreed. This, it is thought, is why the generals delayed his release.

July 8th, the day after he died and the end of a month of official mourning for Abacha's death, had been billed for some time as the moment for Nigeria's new ruler, General Abdulsalam Abubakar, to announce a new programme for the transition to democracy, still promised for October 1st. Although the general dissolved his cabinet earlier in the day, his speech was a bland appeal for calm, plus a promise to address the country “on the character of this administration in due course”.

His failure to provide any indication of a political programme has aroused both disappointment and fear. “It means that Abubakar, who looked so confident to start with, is panicked. It may also mean that there is a rift within the ruling council,” said one observer in Lagos.

Hopes had been high. At the least, General Abubakar had been expected to abolish the five political parties licensed by his predecessor and extend the deadline for the handover until a more convincing political set-up could take over, perhaps at the end of the year. Going beyond this, some thought he might announce a new ruling council, the body that makes the decisions that count. Such a council, made up of former heads of state, could appoint an interim government, steer Nigeria towards elections later in the year and allow the armed forces to begin their retreat to barracks. The military ruling council was meeting again on July 9th; but the anger of the south-west still churned away, with no political outlet.

Privately, many northern Nigerians sighed with relief when Mr Abiola's death was announced. A southerner who was also a Muslim, his election in 1993 would have threatened their 32-year grip on power. The last thing they wanted was his emergence from jail to claim the presidency. Yet the north itself is divided. Many northerners voted for him because he was a Muslim or because most of them are as poor as any southern Nigerian, despite the north's wealthy and powerful upper class.

The great danger is that Mr Abiola's death could push Nigeria into a horror of ethnic violence. If the country is spared this, there could be one positive outcome. The uncertain status of the annulled 1993 election—should it still be observed or not?—has split Nigeria's democracy movement. After four years in prison, the chief had become a symbol of resistance to military rule. Yet many democrats shunned the man, flinching from his dubious past (he built a multi-million-dollar business empire through shady dealings and is known to have backed at least two coups).

But now that he will never rule Nigeria, Mr Abiola can be respected as a martyr for democracy. His critics can join his supporters in a united, democratic coalition.