The Muslim Rights Concern (MURIC) has accused a section of the media and its allies of continuously neglecting the increasing death toll of Nigerian Muslims but are quick to report the fabricated number of dead Christians at the instance of the Christian Association of Nigeria (CAN).
It has come to our notice that the majority of security-related challenges being faced in Nigeria, most of which result in the death of Muslims, especially when in large quantity are mostly unreported or, at best, under-reported; we at the Muslim Rights Concern (MURIC) have seen this as a ploy to portray Muslims as the perpetrators of these various crimes in Nigeria, ranging from terrorism, kidnapping, cattle rustlings, banditry, etc.
The Muslims have always been complacent, consoling themselves without making noise on various social media platforms whenever the unpleasant news of the death of their brothers and sisters in Islam filters in. This is because Allah has emphasised to us through the Holy Quran that “All Souls Shall Taste Death” (Qur’an 3:185), whereas CAN is always quick at playing the victim card, and its voice can be heard at the seventh heaven.
Social media and traditional news media also become awash with unprintable comments to escalate the incident beyond the real magnitude. The Muslims are, therefore, always at the receiving end. In contrast, Muslims lose the highest number of victims of the security challenges Nigeria is currently facing.
It is a known fact that the majority of the act of terrorism by the dreaded terrorist organisation in Nigeria (Boko Haram) has led to the death of more Muslims than Christians; the terrorist group detonated bombs in metropolitan areas in the northern part of Nigeria where the Muslims have the highest population. It is, therefore, only logical to say that the terrorist group targets Muslims more than Christians; thus, any Christian who becomes a victim is more collateral damage because the real targets are the Muslims.
In an effort to set the records straight, MURIC has carried out a statistical analysis of violent attacks and has gathered data on Muslims who were casualties of various attacks carried out by armed groups such as Boko Haram, the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), armed bandits, herdsmen and the so-called unknown gunmen.
It was discovered that between 2021 and 2022, the total number of Muslims who have become casualties is as high as two thousand two hundred and sixty-four (2,264). This figure is for reported cases. Only Allah knows the exact number of thousands of unreported cases of Muslim deaths.
Of this figure, 1,829 were killed by Boko Haram, 288 Muslims fell victim to banditry, 98 were killed by unknown gunmen, 36 by herdsmen and 13 by IPOB.
We appeal to the Muslim populace not to seek vengeance as Allah is sufficient for us, and only Allah knows the punishment most suitable for perpetrators of the killings. We also remind co-country men to tread softly and not to insult the sensitivity and cool-headedness of Nigerian Muslims; our religion teaches “Peace”, and on that mantra, all our engagements are based.
Lastly, while we acknowledge that efforts made by the security agents are already yielding results, we implore them to increase their vigilance to ensure a prosperous and peaceful nation.
The Presidential Candidate of the People’s Democratic Party (PDP), Atiku Abubakar, vowed to implement policies presented to him by Christian Association of Nigeria (CAN) on Tuesday.
According to him, the CAN’s policy document was not in contradiction with his belief, as some of the points presented were contained in the book he wrote when he was a vice president of Nigeria.
The Presidential Candidate made this disclosure during his meeting with the CAN leadership in Abuja Tuesday.
He said, “I have listened to the presentation of the CAN document and I can tell you the CAN document is totally in conformity with my thoughts in a book that I published when I was the Vice President and this led to a fundamental disagreement with my boss as well as my constituents.
“There is no difference between my book and CAN’s presentation. I stand before you not to campaign but to tell you the honest truth, what you have presented is what I have always believed in. And if I have the opportunity, I swear to God I will do it.
“Oil didn’t send me to school, my parents paid cattle tax, market tax, radio tax and these were the taxes that sent me school from primary to university. If God has given you gold or oil, take your oil or gold but I will tax you.
“Why should we be fighting over resources that have been endowed to whoever it is endowed to,” said the presidential candidate.
Atiku was received by the CAN’s President, Archbishop Daniel Okoh, the Secretary of the association, and other executive members.
The CAN’s president, while presenting the document they titled “Policy Roadmap for Future Nigeria”, said the the document was for avoidance of doubt.
He said, “For avoidance of doubt, we present the policies that we believe will address the crises of development in Nigeria.”
Investigations by the Muslim Rights Concern (MURIC) revealed that there had been massive purchases and hoarding of paddy rice across the country by the suspected members of the Christian Association of Nigeria (CAN).
A statement by the MURIC chairman, Kano State Chapter, Mallam Hassan Sani Indabawa, disclosed on Friday, calling on the Nigerian authorities to look into what it described as the ‘unwholesome attitude by the Christian association.
The Muslim body also revealed that CAN is deliberately trying to create artificial food scarcity to discredit the Federal Government by making its efforts in the agriculture sector look like a failure.
The statement read, “Series of investigations conducted by MURIC has revealed a disturbing trend of massive purchase of paddy rice across the rice producing belt, cutting across the three northern agricultural ecological zones of the country. Several reports from the field established that a huge number of strange people are massively buying the commodity in bulk in Kebbi, Niger, Benue, Kaduna, Kano, Jigawa, Bauchi and Yobe states.
“The eight northern states account for over 70% of the rice being produced in the country. Nigeria is currently the largest producer of rice in Africa with a production capacity of 5.0m metric tonnes per annum.
“With the onset of the current harvest season, the unusual high demand for the commodity has already spiked the price upwards, aiming for the roof. While farmers may be happy with a good price, however, the rush for the mass purchase of the commodity is enough to raise some genuine concerns.
“Farmers and other stakeholders noticed an organized and coordinated purchase of the commodity in large quantity. From Kebbi State, down to Gashua in Yobe State, the story of the influx of people, mainly Christians, is the same. They came for massive purchases of tons of rice, both milled and paddy.
CAN make the purchase in large quantity
“Our investigations further point to a high likelihood of the Christian Association of Nigeria (CAN) being involved in this orchestrated mass purchase of rice produced for all Nigerians particularly because the buyers in large quantities are all Christians. They come with their weighing scale and tons of money. It is very suspicious.
“Apart from the existing aggregating centers, new ones have emerged where the commodity is bought at a higher price. This has already made the price of the commodity to jump up at an alarming rate.
“While farmers and local dealers are happy with the new buyers, many are, alarmed by the disturbing trend. Many of the “new rice merchants” admitted to have been mobilized for the exercise. While it is obvious that the ordinary farmer is happy that he is getting ready buyers, the discerning mind must ask the question: Why are they all Christians?
CAN is plotting against Nigeria, Muslims
“The questions begging for answers are: What is the game plan of CAN? Why is the Christian body desperate to make the bulk purchase and hoard the commodity? And why at this crucial time, a few months to the general elections? Their action has already created unnecessary fear and anxiety, as no one is sure of CAN’s motive.
“Is CAN deliberately trying to create artificial scarcity, or is the Christian umbrella body preparing for a worst-case scenario? Or is it trying to discredit the Federal Government by making its efforts in the agriculture sector look like a failure? We all know how food is being weaponized in modern conflicts. Is CAN driving Nigerians to a stage when everyone will be forced to go to church for before they can get rice to buy?
“We call on the Nigerian authorities to look closely into this desperate move. Both the apex body of Nigerian farmers, the Apex Farmers Association of Nigeria (AFAN) and the Rice Farmers Association of Nigeria (RIFAN) admitted to the unusual demand and the unprecedented hike in the price of the commodity at the peak of this year’s harvest season.
“The Federal Government should do the needful by preparing adequately and timely to forestall possible hunger due to mischievous hoarding of this essential commodity by some evil forces. FG can evolve a counter-purchase plan to save Nigerians from the Shylock merchants in CAN. We warn CAN to eschew any diabolical plan it may have with the massive purchase of the commodity,” the statement added.
The Christian Association of Nigeria, CAN, has disassociated the association from reports that it has reached a truce with the Presidential Candidate of the All Progressives Congress, APC, Bola Ahmad Tinubu, on his choice of a Muslim as his running mate.
In a statement released by CAN on Monday, September 5, 2022, CAN distanced itself from the reports that they have endorsed same-faith ticket.
CAN President, Archbishop Daniel Okoh, in a statement released on his behalf by his spokesperson, Luminous Jannamike, described the reports as untrue.
Part of the statement reads, “For the records, CAN took a position against the same-faith ticket imbroglio under the leadership of Rev. Dr Samson Ayokunle, its immediate past national president, and as a matter of fact, His Eminence Archbishop Daniel Okoh, stands on that same position.”
“While CAN may not agree with every decision taken by politicians and political parties, it respects their rights to reach conclusions on issues that affect their electoral fortunes so long as they accord with the provisions of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended) and the Electoral Act (2022).”
Tinubu, a Muslim presidential candidate of the ruling party had chosen Senator Kashim Shettima, also a Muslim, as his running mate for the 2023 presidential election. This political decision has earned CAN’s outrage and multiple criticisms.
The National leadership of Jama’atu Izalatul Bid’ah wa Ikamatus Sunna (JIBWIS), has urged the Christian Association of Nigeria (CAN) to desist from sticking its nose into politics.
Recently, CAN said that there must be a presidential power shift to a Christian to succeed President Buhari in 2023, a comment that continues to generate mixed reactions from Nigerians.
But in a statement on Thursday, 10th March, 2023, the National Leader of the JIBWIS, Sheikh Abdullahi Bala Lau, said the decision as to who should succeed who should be the business of registered political parties not CAN’s.
Bala Lau warned that CAN should not abdicate its responsibility of preaching peace and national stability for politics.
Bala Lau said: “The attention of JIBWIS Nigeria has been drawn to the widely circulated news of Christian Association of Nigeria insisting on a Christian successor for President Muhammadu Buhari in 2023.
“This is as ill-timed as it is dangerous. The position of CAN as widely reported by Nigerian newspapers has elicited reactions that seem to have further overheated the polity. Jibwis Nigeria notes that this, a wrong move, is what you get when religious leadership indulges in decidedly-partisan campaigns.”
According to Bala Lau, CAN’s campaign of the presidential power shift to a Christian successor will not augur well for the country.
He added, “Like any responsible organisation, JIBWIS Nigeria carefully reviews the implication of CAN’s campaign for a shift of Presidential power to a Christian in 2023 with deep concern.
“To begin with, the campaign in favour of a Christian successor for President Buhari does not make sense, if we reflect on the historical reality of where and how power has resided in recent years.”
“It is common knowledge that from 1999 to date, we had Christians dominating the democratic space for 14 years. Break it down: Chief Olusegun Obasanjo, a Christian was in power for 8 years and Dr Goodluck Jonathan had 6 years. Conversely, if we look closely, the Nigerian Presidents who were Muslims were two – Alhaji Umaru Musa Yaradua governed for 2 years and Muhammadu Buhari is now in his second term of 8 years. Unlike CAN, JIBWIS Nigeria is not mounting undue pressure on any political party or group by insisting on a Muslim candidate as a matter of entitlement. All we ask for is that political parties must insist on a competent, capable and upright Nigerian to be fielded.”
“CAN should not court the trouble of the nation’s political party leadership, who have the mandate to screen and nominate candidates and wait for the final verdict of the voters.”
“Most importantly, CAN should be viewed as a respected religious association and not a political party with mandate to determine what qualifies one to be a Buhari successor,” Lau concluded.
“The most dangerous untruths are truths moderately distorted”. – George Lichtenberg
It is not uncommon that some public commentators and analysts could be mischievously deceptive in their narratives and analyses of history to accomplish an end. They could quote historical facts, mix them with fiction, and frame narratives to promote a single story. In some cases, they deliberately relegate and ignore some significant events or points to suit the writer’s bias. Recent writings on the origin and rise of Boko Haram demonstrate how some writers distort facts to frame narrative and promote bigotry.
For instance, if one can closely study the framing of Boko Haram and how it is brazenly becoming one-sided, then one can say that the whole history is rewritten to massage and satisfy the ego of some group’s bigotry. It is not farfetched to say that some of these bigots will soon claim that the generality of the Muslim North endorsed and supported Boko Haram and Nigerian Christians were the only targets and victims of the group’s deadly attacks. Why would I make such a sweeping projection with every sense of finality? To respond to this question, let’s go back to 2013.
While speaking at the 14th meeting of the Honorary International Investor Council (HIIC) held at the Banquet Hall of the Presidential Villa on June 22, 2013, former Nigeria’s President, Goodluck Jonathan, a Christian, disclosed that the Boko Haram sect had killed more Muslims than Christians in Nigeria. This is not just hearsay but a verifiable fact that is naked in vision to people that are not be-clothed with hatred, ethnic and religious jingoism.
However, the Christian Association of Nigeria (CAN) couldn’t swallow this fact and, therefore, issued a statement to disagree with him vehemently. In a press statement credited to the Northern chapter spokesperson, Elder Sunday Oibe, CAN said that Jonathan’s assertion was “misleading and unacceptable”. They further stated that,
“We want to believe that the president was misquoted; we don’t want to believe that with the security apparatus and report from security intelligence network at his disposal, he made this assertion. If it is true that Mr President actually made this assertion, then, we are highly disappointed and sad at this veiled attempt to distort the fact as it concerns the activities of the Boko Haram sect. The purported statement by the President is highly disappointing considering the facts that Christians, churches and their businesses have been the major targets of Boko Haram” (Sahara Reporters, June 23, 2013. http://saharareporters.com/2013/06/23/northern-can-disagrees-jonathan-says-boko-haram-has-killed-more-christians-muslims)
For CAN, the Boko Haram crisis was/is “religious by nature” – the familiar we-versus-them religious clashes and conflicts in Nigeria, although in different outlooks and techniques; it is a plot by some Muslims to reduce the populations of Christians in Nigeria and crackdown their businesses. Since then, CAN sympathisers subsequently frame their narrative of Boko Haram from this angle. An article titled “Cornflakes for Jihad: The Boko Haram Origin Story” by David Hundeyin, widely shared on social media in the last few days, aimed to promote this kind of narrative. Unfortunately, the author skillfully filled the article with half-truths and a mixture of facts and fiction to push the CAN’s sentiment. Hundeyin is practically siding with his former religion.
Firstly, Hundeyin makes an effort to link Sheikh Abubakar Mahmoud Gumi with the origin of Boko Haram. Many people think that Hundeyin’s “Cornflakes for Jihad” is the first futile effort by an “investigative” journalist, analyst, historian or whatever to make this manipulative effort. However, Andrew Walker’s thesis, “Eat the Heart of the Infidels: The Harrowing of Nigeria and the Rise of Boko Haram” (Oxford University Press, 2016), preceded it in that exercise. Therefore, it is not likely to be a false accusation if it is argued that Hundeyin copied the idea of featuring Gumi in discussing Boko Haram, almost verbatim, from Walker. From the arguments of Sheikh Gumi’s “influence” in the “political” realm of Nigeria to his “friendship with Ahmadu Bello”, to pioneering the “propagation of Wahabism” in post-independent Nigeria, to his contribution in the creation of Izala and his “Saudi connection” are equally and loudly echoed in Walker’s thesis.
For both Walker and Hundeyin, Sheikh Abubakar Mahmoud Gumi championed the Sunni/Salafi/Izala movement in Nigeria. Therefore, any account of the origin and rise of Boko Haram – a so-called Sunni/Salafi-fundamentalist terrorist group – must be traced back to him. Albeit impliedly, their submissions suggest that there would be no Boko Haram if Gumi did not “disrupt” the Sufi order and influence of Qadiriyya and Tijjaniya in Northern Nigeria. They claim that Gumi’s campaign of a corrupt-free practice of Islam inevitably gave birth to the radical movements in Northern Nigeria. This is to say, although without explicitly stating it in their works, every Sunni/Salafi-based movement in Nigeria, whether moderate or violent, must have had their inspirational source from Gumi. On the link between Boko Haram founder, Muhammed Yusuf, and Sheikh Gumi, Walker writes: “The title of Yusuf’s book deliberately echoes the titles of similar treatises by Sunni preachers, like Sheikh Gumi’s “The Right Faith According to the Sharia”, perhaps in order to lend his ideas credence…the two clerics share a revulsion for secularism..” (Walker, 2016:144).
This line of argument is even less faulty in logic and spirit of “balanced story” than what Hundeyin further orchestrated in his article. According to Hundeyin, Sheikh Gumi admonished Muslims, particularly his Sunni/Salafi followers, to reject a non-Muslim as a leader and advocated “for insurrection against a Christian Nigerian President” and, of course, his Christian followers. In the successive paragraphs that supported this claim, Hundeyin apprises his readers on the “consequence” of Gumi’s propagation; he states that after Gumi’s death, a Sunni/Salafi-indoctrinated group, which bears the name “Boko Haram”, toed to the path of his admonishment to carry weapons against Nigerian Christians, killing and bombing them in their churches. He wittingly makes reference to the bomb blast at “St. Theresa Catholic Church”, Madalla that “killed 37 people”, and other subsequent “killings of Christians” in Jos and Damaturu.
The implication of this narrative on an outsider, who does not know the context of Boko Haram terrorism in Nigeria, is that s/he would begin to see Sheikh Gumi as “problematic” and a source of Boko Haram’s inspiration and violent extremism. Secondly, a non-pragmatic reader may also assume that the group only targets Nigerian Christians in their series of attacks in the country. Hundeyin’s article aims to peddle that twisted narrative for no reason other than the writer’s hatred for the Muslim North (Arewa) and their Islamic culture. In one of his previous tweets, he heedlessly says that: “The world will be a significantly better place when Arewa culture completely dies off and is replaced with something fit for human civilisation” (David Hundeyin/Twitter, November 29, 2020).
In the spirit of fair analysis, it is expected that an impartial analyst would compare the socio-religious ideas Gumi propagated in his lifetime and the ideologies of Boko Haram. But this would not sell out Hundeyin’s bigotry, and so he ignored that vital aspect. The core centre of Boko Haram dogmatic tenets is a war against “western-styled” education, democracy and civil service. On the other hand, Sheikh Gumi was both a product and proponent of western-styled education; he worked with the government as a civil servant and received salaries from the state resources. As he proudly opined in his autobiography, “among [his] children were army officers, civil servants, medical doctors, an engineer…lawyers, teachers and workers in finance houses and private businesses. There was hardly any profession in which [he] did not have representation from [his] family” (Gumi with Tsiga, 1991:202).
Gumi was also pro-democrat, as evidence from his recorded preaching suggested so. He is famously quoted to have said, “siyasa tafi sallah”, which could loosely mean “politics is more significant than prayers”. This was the extent Gumi had gone to support democracy in Nigeria, and believe me, Shekau would not hesitate to call him “taghut” – an idolatrous tyrant. He had also worked closely with the Christian Head of States. They had a cordial relationship and respect for each other: Ironsi invited him to lead a delegation to North Africa and the Middle East to carry goodwill messages of his new regime; Gowon appointed him Chairman of the Nigerian Pilgrims Board and gave him “all the necessary support, although he himself was a Christian”; with Obasanjo, he could “freely talk” and express his mind on relevant socio-political issues (Gumi with Tsiga, 1991:203). However, Hundeyin willfully refuses to draw this analogy to give a sense of what Achebe called “a balanced story”. Instead, he purposely portrays Sheikh Gumi on the wrong page in the book of terrorist origin in Nigeria.
Contrary to the insinuation of Hundeyin moreover, the truth of the story is that Boko Haram did/do not target Christians only. In fact. Nigerian Muslims suffer(ed) more causalities than Christians in the Boko Haram conflict. Hundeyin refuses to mention the main enclaves of Boko Haram activities and the population ratio of Muslims and Christians there. Stating this factual data will indeed not favour his intended, warped story. The reality is that Muslims have the predominant population in Borno, Yobe and Adamawa States. Arguably, the cumulative of all Boko Haram killings of innocent people would show nothing less than 70% of Muslim casualties.
On a specific, direct attack on religions, Hundeyin only mentions the bomb blast at St. Theresa Catholic Church, ignoring similar incidents on August 11, 2013, at a mosque in Konduga where 44 people were killed and on November 28, 2014, at the central mosque in Kano where 120 people were killed (BBC Hausa, 2013, 2014). It is understandable if Hundeyin re-echoes the bomb blast at St. Theresa Catholic Church in his article; it is a show of solidarity to his ex-religion. However, what is faulty and even worrisome is the selective exemplification of the direct attacks on religions by the Boko Haram insurgents. A reader who is unacquainted with the details of Boko Haram attacks on places of public worship would feel that churches and Christians were the only victims.
Scenes from Kano Central Mosque Bomb Blast. Source: The Eagle Online
To further promote this half-truth, Hundeyin moves on to tell us how a Salafi/Sunni preacher was directly linked with the funding of Boko Haram. I will neither attempt to exonerate Sheikh Yakubu Musa nor believe those serious allegations in toto without reading or hearing the Sheikh’s version of the story. However, my problem here is with Hundeyin’s failure, which is intentional, to mention the Salafi/Sunni preachers that fought Boko Haram vehemently and even paid the ultimate price with their lives. It is on record that at the early stage of the Boko Haram crusade, Salafi scholars debated Mohammed Yusuf. In Bauchi, for instance, Ustaz Idris Abdulaziz Dutsen-Tanshi, a Salafist to the core, invited and challenged Muhammed Yusuf at his mosque and in the presence of his followers; so also a young Isa Ali Pantami – the then Imam of ATBU Juma’at mosque.
Imam Idris Abdulaziz debating Muhammed Yusuf
Imam Isa Ali Pantami Debating Muhammed Yusuf
These Salafists continued to be critical of Muhammed Yusuf and his sect. They consistently delivered lectures to denounce his fatwa. Sheikh Ja’afar Mahmoud Adam, an unapologetic Salafist, was particularly vocal in his public censure and condemnation of Boko Haram. Unlike Hundeyin, Walker states this fact in his book:
“In 2007, Yusuf ’s former teacher, Sheikh Ja’afar Mahmud Adam, himself an ardent Salafist, had gone on record to denounce the group and warn that these ideologues were heading for a violent confrontation with the state” (Walker, 2016:148).
For many, Sheikh Ja’afar was the spiritual successor of Sheikh Abubakar Mahmoud Gumi. Some influential people requested and later attempted to transfer his annual Ramadan Tafseer to Gumi’s preaching base, Sultan Bello Mosque, Kaduna. He conducted his annual Ramadan Tafseer in Maiduguri, the early and central territory of Boko Haram terrorism. During his Tafseer sessions, Sheikh Ja’afar was not reluctant to criticise Yusuf and his new sect. On April 13, 2007, a day to general elections in Nigeria, and barely 48 hours after delivering a talk in Bauchi on Islamic views on thuggery, violence and widespread killing of innocent souls, Sheikh Ja’afar was murdered in Kano while observing Subh prayer and “it is thought to be members of Yusuf’s sect” (Walker, 2016:148).
Another prominent voice among Salafists in the fight against Boko Haram was Sheikh Muhammad Auwal Albani, Zaria. But, unfortunately, he was also killed in cold blood. In a video released to the public, Muhammed Yusuf successor, Abubakar Shekau, took responsibility for the assassination (Sahara Reporters, February 20, 2014, http://saharareporters.com/2014/02/20/bo-haram-leader-claims-responsibity-killing-kaduna-cleric-sheikh-albani-threatens).
Hundeyin has ignored all these facts about Salafi preachers in Northern Nigeria but brought a single dubious claim to frame a narrative that would deceive an uncritical, vulnerable audience. His motive is clear: he wants to rebrand the entire population of Salaaf and the Muslim North as pro-terrorist, supporting the killings of Christians in Nigeria. It is rather unfortunate that this is where the discussion is heading, and it is a wake-up call to those of us that witnessed and had a first-hand experience of the Boko Haram crisis to begin to write our counter-narrative. If we don’t write it, others will write for us. And before we retrieve our consciousness, we will be afloat in a sea of half-truths and stereotypes on Boko Haram, Islam and the North.
Aminu Nuru wrote from Bauchi. He can be contacted via aminuahmednuru@gmail.com.
