Religion and Politics

By Malam Aminu Wase

As 2027 approaches, political activities are beginning to intensify, and the ruling party appears to be doubling down on a familiar strategy, leveraging religious platforms to soften public perception and garner support. Prominent scholars, respected within their communities and beyond, have begun to echo the call for the re-election of President Bola Ahmed Tinubu (PBAT). However, no matter how persuasive or well-intentioned their sermons may be, they are unlikely to succeed. The real barriers to re-election lie not in public misunderstanding, but in harsh realities, widespread economic hardship and perceived religious marginalisation.

For millions of Nigerians, the daily struggle for survival has reached unbearable levels. The cost of living has skyrocketed, inflation is biting, and essential commodities have become luxuries. Unemployment, insecurity, and a declining naira have added to the misery. No sermon can explain away the pain of a father who cannot feed his family or a mother who must choose between school fees and food.

These issues are not simply the result of global economic trends; they are widely seen as the direct consequence of poor policy decisions and failed leadership. The fuel subsidy removal, naira redesign, and other policies implemented under the administration of PBAT have plunged the nation into deeper poverty. The promises made have not matched the lived experiences of ordinary Nigerians.

But the issue runs deeper than economic pain. From the outset, the PBAT ticket was mired in controversy due to its Muslim-Muslim composition, a bold and, to many, insensitive political gamble in a nation as religiously diverse as Nigeria. While religion should not define leadership capability, the symbolic message of that choice alienated a significant portion of the population, particularly Christians in the North and across the north central, who felt unrepresented and sidelined.

Now, as sermons and appeals emerge urging the faithful to give PBAT another chance, they appear tone-deaf to these deeper grievances. Nigerians are not voting out of loyalty to religious leaders; they are voting out of lived reality, one marked by pain, exclusion, and hopelessness. Religious endorsements may have once carried weight, but today, the electorate is more discerning and less forgiving.

The nation is yearning not for sermons, but for solutions. Not for promises, but for results. Not for symbolic gestures, but for genuine leadership that reflects the diversity and aspirations of its people. Trying to wrap political desperation in religious robes will only deepen the resentment.

In 2027, the real campaign message will not be on posters or pulpits; it will be in the stomachs of the hungry, the frustration of the jobless, and the prayers of those seeking justice and inclusion. If the ruling party fails to address these concerns directly, no endorsement, religious or otherwise, can rescue what is already a sinking ship.

Malam Aminu Wase is a political analyst and advocate for good governance and Youth inclusion. He can be reached at aminusaniusman3@gmail.com.

By Muhammad Rabiu Jibrin (Mr. J)                 

Isn’t the religious institution now on the brink of suffering the same fate as the traditional institution, whose integrity, moral authority, and influence have been swept away by the political hurricane?

Historically, the Nigerian traditional and religious institutions were best known as the custodians of culture and justice, commanding immense respect and dignity. They were no-go areas with clear boundaries known to politicians. Their political neutrality, ethical brevity, and golden silence made them stand out, shielding them against political threats and disrespect. But with the gradual mental shift and negligence of purpose, the passage of time paved unnoticeable ways for political interference in their affairs, rendering them into a vulnerability that warms what once cooled them.

Although the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria does not clearly prohibit traditional rulers from engaging in politics, it expects public officeholders, including traditional rulers, to remain neutral. The state laws of most states, if not all, prohibit traditional rulers from participating in partisan politics, as such acts can be seen as a breach of their traditional duties and a justification for removal.

History has shown that most allegations against Emirs were connected to issues like partisan politics, outspoken nature, and mismanagement, among others. On March 9, 2020, the Kano State government under Governor Abdullahi Ganduje officially dethroned Sanusi Lamido Sanusi as the Emir of Kano. His grandfather, Emir Muhammadu Sanusi I (1953–1963), faced the same issue under the Premier of the Northern Region, Sir Ahmadu Bello, on April 10, 1963. Similarly, Emir Mustapha Jokolo of Gwandu (1995–2005) was deposed in June 2005 by the Kebbi State government under Governor Muhammad Adamu Aliero, while Emir Abubakar Atiku of Zurmi (2010–2012) was removed from his position by the Zamfara State government in 2012.

Having successfully influenced traditional institutions, are Nigerian politicians not now attempting to test the same waters on religious institutions through their appointments and donations services?

How our religious leaders glorify and endorse politicians while also criticising one another on political matters in mosques, churches, or during their religious sermons is akin to setting a bushfire that would consume all its inhabitants. It is not difficult for politicians to offer them lucrative sums of money, gift them extravagant cars, and so forth, enabling them to manipulate their views and dilute their words during sermons for material gain.

The silver lining is that the spiritual blueprints and the footsteps that guide them would resolutely remain unchanged till eternity, no matter their deviation.

The recent verbal altercation between Sheikh Sani Yahaya Jingir and Sheikh Muhammad Kabir Gombe, which stemmed from the issue of the ‘Qur’an Festival,’ is disheartening. I view Sheikh Sani Yahaya Jingir as a cleric who strives to speak the truth but often talks excessively. He is a mature, responsible Sheikh who should not demean himself by engaging in disputes with younger individuals like Sheikh Kabiru Gombe. His reputation, knowledge, and age should elevate him beyond such conflicts. He ought to discourage the young, emerging ‘Shuyukh’ under his mentorship from becoming involved in such matters, let alone involving himself.

As for Sheikh Kabiru Gombe, I see his utterances as disrespectful and illogical toward a man of that age, no matter the heat of the moment. If two ‘Shuyukh’ and their followers resort to ranting and calling each other names, what credibility do their preachings hold, and how will their followers perceive them? Where is the unity, patience, and love for one another that Islam teaches and which they claim to promote? No matter the misunderstanding, religious leaders should be careful with their words toward one another in all circumstances.

In conclusion, unless our religious leaders fight selfishness among themselves, adhere to the teachings of Islam, respect one another despite divergent views, and remain united, the future will unravel unfavourably. Only by adhering to the holistic teachings of Islam and the prophetic tradition can they stand resolute against any factor that seeks to erode their strength.

Muhammad Rabiu Jibrin (Mr.J) wrote via muhammadrabiujibrin@gmail.com.

By Umar Ahmad El-Rufai

Sheikh Ibrahim Khalil is a renowned Islamic scholar. However, as a gubernatorial candidate in Kano, he didn’t hide under religion to win an election.

Whether you know it or not, he didn’t beg others to endorse him due to his identity as an Islamic scholar. He regards himself as a politician. Every politics is local.

He campaigned like everyone and participated in politics. That’s his constitutional right. However, he neither sought donations from his students nor others dignitaries.

As a result of Malam’s political journey, anyone among our Islamic scholars is free to venture into politics now. Nobody should hide under religion to achieve his political goals.

Sheikh Ibrahim Khaleel became chairman of the Northwest Nigeria Council of Ulama, an organisation of Muslim religious leaders. He has been opening big doors with small keys. 

I regard him as a winner that reforms the system. As a result, nobody will come to get cheap popularity under religion. That’s a victory for everyone.

Politics is good to some. Mallam will be remembered as a political reformist. So do your politics; don’t hide under religion. The game is over.

Umar Ahmad Rufai wrote from Kano via umarahmadrufaijr@gmail.com. He is a student at Dala College of Education.

By Dr Raji Bello

Nigerians are not known for their ability to figure out the long-term consequences of their actions. This is a major national handicap since some choices which produce short-term gain could lead to long-term pain. For instance, in 1999, the governor of Zamfara state introduced a new social order in the state in defiance of the authority of the Federal Government of Nigeria. The new order spread across the northern states along with a strong wave of triumphalism. 

In the years that followed, groups of non-state actors across the country learnt something from what happened in Zamfara – that a group of determined people within a defined geographical area could defy the Federal Government and impose their will without any consequences. Inspired by this knowledge, a new Islamic militant group soon appeared somewhere in Yobe state, which later grew into Boko Haram – and the rest is now history.

Militants in the Niger Delta, who were also observing developments in the North, concluded that the Federal Government was indeed weak and its authority could be challenged without consequences. An insurgency soon took firm roots in the area. Many years later, young herdsmen around the country and secessionists in the Southeast also decided that it was time to take on the government and Nigerian society. Over 20 years later, long after the triumph of 1999/2000 has faded, we are still living with the pain of the chain of developments that it had sparked.

Once again, there is palpable triumphalism in the land. Our newly-elected Muslim-Muslim presidency has elicited exuberance in the Muslim community and foreboding on the Christian side. Prominent Muslims are already lining up to claim ownership of the president-elect and his religious identity. The Muslims are glad that the apparent consolidated Christian vote for Mr Obi has failed to achieve its aim. Christians, on the other hand, see their voting preference as justified because of the sheer brazenness of the APC in coming up with a Muslim-Muslim ticket right at the end of the two terms of a Muslim president who was not even known for respecting diversity in his appointments.

The 2023 elections will mark the time when the religious cleavage in Nigeria deepened to dangerous levels. In fact, the frontlines of the religious battle have already shifted to some upcoming gubernatorial contests. In Taraba state, the CAN has allegedly circulated a statement alerting Christians in the state of the impending battle while Muslim clerics all over the North have united in charging Taraba Muslims for the solemn task ahead.

Also, in Nasarawa state, there is a fear that the Labour Party could repeat its earlier presidential election feat and elect a Christian governor for the state. Other states like Plateau, Gombe, Adamawa, Kaduna, Niger etc, may also witness more hardening of intercommunal attitudes going forward. 

There will be even more foreboding on the Christian side when the practical elements of the Muslim-Muslim presidency begin to manifest. For example, media coverage will show both the president and vice-president of Nigeria at Eid prayer grounds while only the SGF or senate president will be left to lead the celebrations of Christmas and Easter.

The other multiplier effects of this new paradigm can’t even be fully imagined now. I expect that in the fullness of time when all the predictable consequences are playing out, the few discerning ones among us will ask, was Bola Tinubu’s Muslim-Muslim ticket really worth it in the long run?

Raji Bello writes from Yola, Adamawa State.

By Uzair Adam Imam

The Kaduna State Governor, Nasir El-Rufa’i, expressed concern over the way some politicians were using religion and ethnicity to create division in their campaigns.

The governor also stressed on the need to punish policians using religion in their political campaigns.

He spoke at the commissioning ceremony of the head office of the Sultan Foundation for Peace and Development held in Kaduna.

He stated that the 2023 election would be a golden opportunity for Nigerians to take region out of politics.

He said the 2023 elections presented a unique opportunity for Nigerians to take religion out of politics.

El-Rufa’i was qouted to have said, “People are united in their poverty, in their need for education, in decent healthcare and to put food on their table, that is what we should focus on but some people are holding meetings to promote religious and ethnic division.

That is the last thing Nigeria needs at a time when the whole world is facing challenges of ultra-nationalism and global supply chain disruption.”

He then asked for forgiveness, saying, “We try to do what is right but only God is right, my apologies to anyone that I have offended, we have five months to go and I will like to leave and sleep in peace.”

By Muhammadu Sabiu

Matthew Kukah, the Catholic Bishop of Sokoto Diocese, has cautioned politicians against exploiting politics in the nation through religion, noting that a severe result would follow such a move just as it had in Germany during Adolf Hitler’s rule.

On Tuesday in Abuja, as part of the celebrations for his 70th birthday, Kukah spoke at the launch of his new book, Broken Truth.

“If you look at history, there is a consequence for using religion to manipulate politics. We just need to look at Germany. The consequences are there to see in Hitler.

“The problem is that the Nigerian political elites lack the mental capacity to understand the consequences of the fire they are stoking because there is nothing to suggest that the average person who is living in the north, who is Fulani, who is a Muslim, or who is Hausa, can say that they are proud of the Nigerian political system, beyond a very tiny percentage.

“So, if you decide that you want to give privilege to a religion or an ethnic group, what will happen is that others automatically become outsiders,” the bishop was quoted as saying.

Additionally, he indicated that protests are still taking place in the nation because the populace is more knowledgeable than those in charge of its affairs.

Kukah added, “The agitation that persists in Nigeria is largely borne out of the fact that those who govern us are not aware of how much mental progress ordinary people have made.

“Those who are being governed are more intelligent and endowed. And it will not have been a bad thing if people who don’t know seek knowledge.”

By Dr Babayo Sule

The revolution in social media, no doubt, made life fascinating for the present generation in information dissemination and data assembling but most importantly, in harnessing dialogue among inter-cultural and diverse complex groups cutting across the universe unprecedented. Many societies are positively utilising the leverage of social media to develop their political and socio-economic sectors individually and collectively. However, in Nigeria, social media is dangerously setting us on the path of collapsing our values and tolerance and it is ambitiously threatening to magnify ignoramus into the regalia of scholarship while scholars are being relegated to objects of caricature. This is anticipated in the warnings of Daniel J. Levitin in his Weaponised Lies: How to Think Critically in the Post-Truth Era and Nicole A. Cooke’s Fake News and Alternative Facts: Information Literacy in a Post-truth Era, that the era of honest ideas and truth is fast passing and this is palpable more in our environment where things are twisted deliberately for sentiment or personal agenda. This has manifested in the recent development in national issues where the bedevilling monster of insecurity is becoming worrisome. The high level of ignorance in understanding, interpreting, comparing and linking issues in Nigeria bordering religion, politics, economy and other social issues is nauseating. This is evident in the use and abuse of the term ‘Interfaith’ by social media interlocutors. 

The two Arabic terms are mixed up unconsciously by itinerant merchants of social media but most surprising, by even some religious Sheiks either deliberately or out of ignorance. The term ‘Wahdatul Adyan’ (unification of religions) in the Arabic language can never be the same as ‘Hiwar Al Adyan’ (interfaith dialogue). Unification of religion means collapsing of faith to become one while interfaith dialogue means debates, comparative studies and discussions of understandings as well as the relationship among followers of a different faith. The word ‘Hiwar’, dialogue, was mentioned three times in the Qur’an 18:34; 18:37 and 58:1.

How can Islam, for example, collapse and become one with Christianity when Islam philosophises the unity of Allah (SWT) while Christianity accepts the doctrine of ‘Trinity’ or how can Islam unite with Judaism that does not believe in Jesus Christ and Prophet Muhammad (SAW), at least, the current version of it? Or how can Christianity unite with Judaism that does not believe in Jesus Christ? Can Islam ever accept any form of law besides the Shari’ah principles? 

A scholar, popularly known as ‘Digital Imam’ made some utterances on escalating insecurity situation in a delivered sermon which eventually led to his removal. The crux of the matter is that I am not in support or opposing what the Imam uttered in his furious outburst. Many messengers have their philosophy, style, methodology and perspective of conveying messages based on their training, background, experience and the environment. How or why the Imam decided to deliver the message in the mode he did was not the main concern here. Some may see it right while others may see it as unfit and all are right in their perception. I am not in defence or support of the Imam and his words nor am I his spokesperson but some misperceptions, distortions and misrepresentations of the term ‘interfaith’ need to be cleared to avoid the created confusion. However, the annoying aspect of the issue is the way the ‘message’ was totally ignored and the messenger is being crucified on account of being what they called ‘Interfaith’. 

And what is interfaith? Is it a polytheistic process or a pronouncement that will disqualify one from Islam? Does interfaith has a basis from the religious roots and branches? Is our education level annihilated to the extent that our social media pedestrians could not understand what it is or is learning Islamic scholarship withering away to the level of misunderstanding Islam or misusing it? What is the link between sermon on insecurity and participation of Digital Imam in interfaith? Interfaith means dialogue among the various Abrahamic religions of Judaism, Islam and Christianity to promote peaceful co-existence and to understand more the philosophy of each other to avoid sustained mutual hostility. The Merriam Webster Dictionary defines interfaith as activities involving persons of different religious faith. Going by this definition, who is not involved in activities with persons of different faiths in Nigeria?

Islam is a religion that by virtue of its philosophy encourages logic, wisdom and reasoning. It challenges its believers to ponder on signs and symbols of the divinity and unity of Allah and the truthfulness of the religion. Allah (SWT) dialogues with His Angles on the wisdom, logic and the reason for creating the weak Adam (AS) and placing him on earth despite the weakness and the vulnerability to sins (Q. 2 verses 30-35). If Allah (SWT) wishes, He will simply create without consultation or dialogue and made the Angels prostrate compulsorily without any resistance or disobedience by Satan but for His prior knowledge of all, He wanted it that way. Is there no lesson for mankind in it to understand that reasons and logic are used in dialogue to convince?

Allah (SWT) in many places commands that believers should reflect and find faith in Islam not follow what is bequeathed to them by their ancestors presenting to them logical arguments, scientific facts, miracles and points of pondering. Prophet Nuh (AS) engaged his people in peaceful interfaith dialogue to convince them to believe in his religion for 950 years using alternative views and arguments (Q.7 verses 59-64; Q.10 verses 71-73; Q.11 verses 25-49; Q.21 verses 76-77; Q.23 verses 23-30; Q.25 verses 37; Q.26 verses 105-122; Q.29 verses 14-15; Q.37 verses 75-82 and Q.71 the complete chapter).

What about Prophet Ibrahim (AS)? He could have argued forcefully with the divine support and protection and ridiculed his people for worshipping idols that they had created with their hands but instead, he chose the path of wisdom and logic and the power of peaceful dialogue to make them understand particularly being careful of the presence of his father among the idolaters. Several Qur’anic chapters and verses (Q.2 verse 258; Q.14 verses 35-41; Q.19 verses 41-50; Q.21 verses 51-73; Q.26 verses 69-104; Q.29 verses 16-27; Q.37 verses 83-113 and Q.43 verses 26-31).

In all the chapters and verses above, Ibrahim (AS) used a superior dialogue with wisdom, chosen soft words and logic to explain his faith before the idolaters. Then take the instance of Musa (AS) who had not only debates with the Pharaoh and his people but went the extra mile in the demonstration of faith and interfaith dialogue under the command of Allah (SWT) in the Pharaoh’s palace. Many chapters and verses (Q.7 verses 103-173; Q.10 verses 75-93, Q.11 verses 96-99; Q.17 verses 101-105; Q.20 the complete chapter; Q.25 verses 35-36; Q.26 verses 10-68; Q.27 verses 7-14; Q. 28 verses 1-50 and several others too numerous to mention all here). It should be noted that Prophet Musa (AS) dialogued with his people profusely in convincing them against Shirk (polytheism) after he rescued them from Pharaoh using logic and wisdom (Q.2 verses 40-61; Q.7 verses 137-141 and Q.20 verses 83-97) and Prophet Musa (AS) also dialogue and went into a voyage of discovery with Khidr (AS) (Q.18 verses 60-86). 

Other Prophets (AS) dialogued in what is closer to interfaith with their people which time will not allow for all of them to be enumerated here but some few cases are still necessary. Prophet Ilyas (AS) dialogued with his people and showed them a reason to desist from worshipping a lamb as mentioned in Q.37 verses 123-132. Prophet Yusuf (AS) also convinced his inmates’ partners and his people of the unity of Allah (SWT) through an interfaith dialogue (Q.12 verses 37-41). Prophet Isa (AS) was shown the path of dialogue by Allah (SWT) when he was asked if he is behind the instigation for people to worship him when he responded beautifully, respectfully, logically and scientifically in this way (Q.5 verses 116-120) and he also tried and convinced his disciples on the miracle and powers of Allah (SWT) when they challenged him for manna (Q.5 verses 112-115) and elsewhere (Q.19 verses 30-33), Prophet Isa (AS) dialogue with his people to convince them while in his infancy that his mother Maryam (AS) was innocent and that he was a miracle of Allah (SWT). 

The most astonishing aspect of those who wanted to confuse interfaith with unity of faith is their lack of acumen in understanding ‘Asbabul Nuzul’ (purpose of revelation of Qur’anic verses) otherwise they would have saved their ignorance before the public humiliation. One of the outstanding characteristics of the Makkan chapters and verses of the Glorious Qur’an is the dialogue between the Prophet (PBUH) and Makkan infidels to scientifically show them the logic and reason of worshipping Allah (SWT) alone and the dirtiness of idolatry. These chapters and verses are too many to mention here. When Christians from Najran (Nazareth), a place near Madina in those days, heard the preaching and teaching of Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) on Jesus Christ, they approached the Prophet (PBUH) for interfaith dialogue and that was the reason for the revelation of Q.3 verses 33-83 as mentioned by Al-Ghazali in his book ‘Asbabul Nuzul’ and also as narrated by Imam Ibn Kathir in his ‘Tafsir’ (Qur’anic exegesis or commentary). 

The Prophet (PBUH) did not only engage in interfaith dialogue but he agreed that Muslims under threat and vulnerability can seek shelter in other places of different religions when necessary. He asked his companions to migrate to Ethiopia where a Christian king was ruling, Najjash (Negus). The Makkan oligarchs, Abu Jahl and Abu Sufyan sent a delegation to King Negus to convince him to return the Muslim believers to Makka so that they could persecute them until they revert to idolatry. They went to the king with gifts and presents but he rejected their request.

The representatives of Makkan infidels adopted emotional manipulation by telling King Negus that Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) and his followers were also saying evil things about Mary and Jesus Christ (AS). The king summoned Muslims to his palace and questioned them. One of the companions, the Prophet’s cousin, Ja’afar Bin Abi Talib, explained to him their idolatry and decadent situation before the emergence of Islam and went ahead to recite before him the Surah Maryam Q.19 verses 16-40. The scholars of history like Ibn Hisham and Ibn Kathir reported that king Negus and his people wept on hearing these verses which was the reason for revealing Q.5. verses 82-85. Later. King Negus converted to Islam and the Prophet (PBUH) prayed for him from Madina which served as the juristic justification for ‘Salatul Gha’ib’. 

Apart from the above views on interfaith dialogue, many companions of the Prophet (PBUH) were reported in authentic hadiths by Bukhari and other reporters and scholars of the history of engaging Jews in Madina, Christians and pagans in interfaith dialogue using the Qur’an and other sources heard from the Prophet (PBUH). Ibn Taymiyyah, one of the medieval Islamic respected scholars devoted an entire book of two volumes in interfaith dialogue with Christians titled Al Jawabul Sahih li man Baddala Dinal Masih (Answer to those who Altered the Religion of Jesus Christ). Besides, contemporary Islamic jurists have their views on interfaith dialogue. For instance, Ismael Raji Al Faruqi characterises dialogue as Da’awah which includes preaching Islamic teachings, promoting virtues and avoiding vices and providing comprehensive knowledge to understand the purpose of life. 

The Christians and Jews are addressed with respect in the Qur’an ‘as people of the book’. The Prophet (PBUH) was reported to have been visiting the ill in Madina irrespective of their faith (Tirmidhi). The Prophet was sympathetic, patient and understanding with people of other faith. He never imposed Islamic laws on them. Abu Hurairah narrated that once a group of Jewish scholars came to the Prophet (PBUH) and declared that one of them committed adultery. The Prophet (PBUH) judged the matter using the Jewish scriptures and not Islamic laws (Al Tabari).

In essence, most Islamic jurists agreed that Islamic teachings are not in favour of eliminating the preaching of other faiths. Islam is, instead, in favour of counterbalance as a means of creating a harmonious environment instead of confrontation. This is mentioned in the Quran (Q.22 verse 40). It is based on this that the power of Qur’anic dialogue challenged the entire universe to produce its like or to ponder on the saved corpse of Pharaoh Menerpter as a sign of miracle of Islam and the Glorious Quran open for a challenge by those interested. An attempt to do so earned Islam valuable converts such as Professor Mike Moore, Professor Maurice Bucaille, Professor Gerald Dirk, Dr Gary Miller and many famous global scholars of various fields of human endeavour. 

The question to ask ourselves is, if not because of the flavour and the assistance of interfaith dialogue, how could the gallant intellectuals armies of Islam confront the entire world with intellectual discourses of comparative knowledge? The blessed Sheikh Ahmed Deedat, Sheikh Dr Zakir Naik, Dr Abu Ameenah Bilal Philips and other ones who stand tall in the hall of fame of comparative religion and remain unchallenged by all religions when it comes to dialogue and reasons. How many hundreds of thousands or millions have they converted to Islam successfully? Could those against interfaith serve Islam in this capacity? What about the blessed Adnan Oktar aka Harun Yahya who solely demolished Darwinism and Marxism by the mighty power of his Islamic dialogue pen?  Have we forgotten our own, Sheik Auwal from Jigawa State who has been busy propagating Islam in America? What about the blessed Sheik Hussaini Yusuf Mabera? What about the good work of the Da’awah Institute of Nigeria in bridging the gap of knowledge closer to what even a layman can comprehend? Please what is the name of what they are doing? What about Nigerian Inter-Religious Council? What is it and who are the members? It is a civil society of interfaith dialogue and action involving the supreme spiritual leader of Islam, his Eminence, the Sultan of Sokoto and the Chairman of the Christian Association of Nigeria (CAN), other distinguished scholars of Islam and Christianity just for the information of the misguided interfaith antagonists. 

It is frightening that the Nigerian Ummah is gradually drifting towards Al Qaradawi’s description of extremism and Abdulkadir Oudah’s ignorant followers and incapable scholars. Al Qaradawi in his book, Islamic Awakening Between Rejection and Extremism warned that extremism is an uncalled duty to Islam by ignorance which has six symptoms including bigotry and intolerance, commitment to excessiveness, uncalled for austerity, severity and harshness, thinking ill of others and Takfir stage which is the dangerous one. Abdulkadir Oudah in his view argues that Islam and Muslims are suffering from the comity of ignorant followers and the inaction of incapable scholars aided by amoral leadership.

The debates on interfaith by some scholars wrongly and the perception of ignorant followers exhibited this fear and it is tilting towards the symptoms of extremism warned by Al Qaradawi which we must be cautious of. Of course, some of the views may not lack relevance to late Dr Yusuf Bala Usman’s postulation of the manipulation of religion in Nigeria but it is shameful and uncalled for. Saying an opinion or a view before the public must have a moral burden. Ibn Qayyim Al Jawzi in his book Ilamul Muqi’ina an Rabbil Aalamin exponentially exposed us to the intricacies of those who can speak on Islamic issues and fatwas and the chain of authorities that can qualify one to be among them. I don’t think the interfaith interlopers qualified to be among the ones listed by Ibn Qayyim.

I am not in any way in convergence with Digital Imam on that fateful sermon. It is wrong to advocate for a boycott of the election in a democratic clime. It is an unpatriotic, irreligious and social disservice.  We differ completely in this perspective. Instead, I am an unrepentant advocate for voting and election and a transparent one for the better. In an era where the leaders failed glaringly but their failure is not instilling remorsefulness in them to desist from power scramble, how could the voters sacrifice their legitimate opportunity to vote? In essence, I am calling on Nigerian voters not only to vote but to vote a protest vote on target. To identify candidates on their own, sponsor them, vote for them and guard their votes to succeed for better governance without regarding any party (parties that lack ideology or even principles) do not matter in developing democracies more than individuals in elections. 

Based on the above observation, I am suggesting the following as remedies against this detrimental degeneration that will consume us if we are not careful.

1. The Digital Imam and other religious leaders should invoke the saying of Allah (SWT) in delivering their messages Q. 16 verse 125 “call to the way of your Lord with wisdom and goodly exhortation, and reason with them in the best manner possible. Surely your Lord knows best who has strayed away from His path, and He also knows well those who are guided to the Right Way”. 

2. People should desist from throwing themselves into the arena of knowledge and scholarship based on anecdotal stories and emotions while those who know but are trying to divert the subject matter or discussions should fear Allah (SWT) and relay that which is the truth because “Not a word does he utter but there is a sentinel by him, ready (to note it)” (Q.50 verse 18) and “And do not pursue that of which you have no knowledge. Indeed, the hearing, the sight and the heart – about all those [one] will be questioned” (Q.17 verse 36). 

3. Matters should be dealt with accordingly instead of manipulated. Matters of security discussed by a cleric should not be dismissed away for trivialities such as interfaith. Interfaith is a different subject matter so also a sermon and issues of insecurity why lump them unnecessarily?

4. The social media abuse should be checked by authorities before another Tunisian model is engineered deliberately out of ignorance or sentiments. Government has the legal duty to do so. In an era where wise people are using social media for business, we are busy abusing it for the promotion of ignorance.

5. A strong Shura committee is needed to check fatwas and online scholars that are incapable of judging a simple matter or need rigorous scholarship training before their views can see the light of the day. 

6. Ahlul zikr should kindly intervene and educate our Ummah on critical issues to avoid misperceptions, distortions and misrepresentations of facts that can drag our youth into ideologies that will throw our society into further disaster.

Dr Babayo Sule is the H.O.D International Relations, Faculty of Social Sciences, Federal University of Kashere, Gombe State.

By Bilyamin Abdulmumin

The nation has woken up with yet another round of controversial news, as the committee to the National Assembly mosque, Apo legislative quarters Abuja, deemed it fit to suspend the renowned Islamic cleric Sheikh Nuru Khalil before sacking him later. The committee cited incitement and lack of showing remorse as reasons for the suspension and the final sacking, respectively.

Last week’s Friday prayer sermon the Sheikh delivered was the action that earned him the sack. In the sermon, reeling from the Abuja-Kaduna train attack tragedy, the Sheikh supported a boycott of the upcoming 2023 general election should the government fail to protect the lives of Nigerians. This message immediately went viral to generate a heated debate among the public on social media.

Those who support the message have some reasons. Because it was just history that repeated itself; before the 2015 general election, Nigeria, especially the North, was literally on fire. Amidst the chaos majority of the northern Islamic clerics openly criticized the government of the day – PDP, while drumming support for the opposition – APC.

Fast forward, seven years later, the table has turned. The APC is in charge, and similar to the eve period of the 2015 general election, the insecurity is threatening the country again. So, for this category of view, what is good for the goose should also be good for the gender.

Some try to strike a balance. According to these people, the Sheikh’s sermon was right, but they argue that leadership comes with responsibility. So, a leader with a large audience has both privilege and responsibility. Some of these responsibilities are eschewing opinion, unlike any ordinary person who doesn’t mince words. In other words, the Sheik should have a tread with caution. 

Some categories look at it from the extremism tendency. According to them, some extremists, such as Muhammad Yusuf, the Boko haram leader, started as a spokesperson to the masses. First, he became a fierce critic of the government, but later, when his antics escalated to insurgency, those masses clapping for him became the most victims in the end.

Some sought to politicize the controversy. According to them, the Sheikh has pitched a tent around the opposition – PDP, so they claim he has been a critic of the Buhari government for the last seven years. These critics sealed their arguments with the allegations that the Sheikh was appointed an Imam at a mosque built by Atiku Abubakar, a new Jumu’at Mosque behind the Central Bank Nigeria (CBN) Quarters, Abuja.

The peculiarity of any argument is that if anyone is allowed to explain his view, one will somehow see a reason for their claim. The above four viewpoints on the same thing are good examples.

By and large, if there is anything this raging debate achieved, it is one thing: it made Nigerians forget the series of other pressing issues like the ASUU strike, fuel scarcity, the naira to dollar depreciation, VP Osinbajo, Minister Pantami, and Farooq debates, even the plight of the actual victims of the attack (may theirs be a speedy release, harmless). One Nigerian coined this scenario: “one rising issue after another makes Nigerians forget their suffering; Nigerians live for the moment.”

Bilyamin Abdulmumin is a PhD candidate in Chemical Engineering at ABU Zaria. He is also an activist for a better, informed society.

By Usama Abdullahi

Two things are so sure in life. The first is we are all going to die someday. The second is a person is most likely to suffer for being honest at all times. However, in this recent case of Sheikh Nuru Khalid, we can attest to the second fact.

You don’t expect anything good from people who hate hearing and being told the truth. It doesn’t surprise me to see Sheikh Nuru Khalid being unfairly relieved of his role as the Chief Imam of the Apo Legislative Mosque by the Mosque Committee under the chairmanship of Senator Dan Sadau.

For that’s what you get when you decide to stick with the truth. My fear is not him being fired for speaking against the cruelty of this present government but how politicians manipulate our religious leaders. They use them as baits to help tame or silence the veracious clerics who speak truth to power. This has been the norm for many years now. What makes it look appalling is that those easily manipulated clerics reduce themselves to mere sycophants.

Aside from getting lured into misquoting the Holy Books and preaching only what best suits the hearing of their political godfathers, they try to persuade their followers to believe all the rubbishes they preach. So, to be sincere, I wasn’t surprised when I learnt of the dismissal of the “Digital Imam” over his true statement about the government. It’s not like what the media paints. His sermons weren’t anti-government. 

Yes, his Friday sermon was just a simple reminder and awareness of how to call our hardened and irresponsible government to task. Sheikh Nuru Khalid doesn’t speak for himself alone. He represents the voice of the oppressed masses who brought this government to power through their votes. Only the patriotic and religious ones will fully understand what he preaches. They are the only ones who will realise that this government doesn’t care about the plight of the poor citizens who voted them to power.

It’s so disappointing that he got sacked because of his intestinal fortitude and truthfulness. I saw this coming, considering how fierce he’s lately been in criticising this government for their failure to secure the lives of the people they had sworn to defend. I see his calculated dismissal as more of a  politically advised plan to compel him to complete silence so that they will continue to suppress us by being neglectful regarding safeguarding our vulnerable lives without him chastising them for their ugly sins.

What frustrates me more is knowing that his dismissal letter was full of grammatical inaccuracies and negotiated by people who are said to be genuine Muslims. Yet, their actions betray their faith and academic standings. Islam neither promotes nor tolerates such despicable acts. It’s the religion of peace. Hence, there’s no room for what they did in Islam.

We should be happy that he still breathes because we have seen how some of his likes were slain for saying the same thing. In case you forget, truth-telling cost Sheikh Jaafar and Albany Zaria their noble lives. So, it’s little wonder that the Digital Imam was just sacked. We’ll never get it better by hiding under the pretence of religion to promote and cover up the faults and interests of those usually self-seeking politicians. Accordingly, it’s unfair to deny our clerics the podium to speak truth to power simply because of political gains. 

Usama Abdullahi wrote from Abuja, Nigeria. He can be reached via usamagayyi@gmail.com

By Ahmad Deedat Zakari.

The Redeemed Christian Church of God (RCCG) has created a new directorate, named the “Office of Directorate of Politics and Governance.”

This development was contained in a memo dated February 28, 2022, and signed by the Assistant General Overseer Administration and Personnel of RCCG, Pastor J.F. Otedola.  

“We write to formally notify you that the mission authority has created the Office of Directorate of Politics and Governance in the RCCG. Further to this, Pastor Timothy Olaniyan (PICP Lagos Province ) has been appointed to lead the Office” The first paragraph of the memo reads.

Pastor Otedola also requested for provincial officers to be appointed for each province of the RCCG and all levels of the church with utmost urgency in respect of the new directorate. 

“You are kindly requested to appoint with immediate effect a Provincial Officer for your Province and also ensure that same is done at all levels of the Church – Zone, Area and Parish. The essence of this Directorate is to help coordinate the engagement of our people who are willing to be involved in Politics as well as mobilise support for them when required,” the memo further reads.

Nigeria’s Vice-President, Professor Yemi Osinbajo, maintains a father and son relationship with RCCG General Overseer, Pastor E. A Adeboye, is in charge of the Lagos Province 48 (Olive Tree Province Headquarters) of the RCCG. The recent development coming from the church cannot be unconnected with his 2023 presidential ambition.  

People have expressed different views on politics and religion and the active participation of the church and religious bodies. 

According to Mr Peter Onah, “they are biblical figures that participated actively in politics”. He added that religion and politics are two different things that can go together.

However, Mr Nurudeen Bukar, who was confronted by the Daily Reality on the issue of politics and religion, expressed a different view. According to him, “it is best when religion focuses on its primary mandate of preaching and guiding people”.

Bukar argued that partisan politics is not suitable for religious groups as it will distract them from their religious obligations.