"When it is remembered that the Sultan and CAN president are co-chairmen of the National Inter-Religious Council (NIREC) and have to date spoken with one voice, this public disagreement is symptomatic of something deep"
The 2011 general election, which, finally came to a close on Friday May 7, with the so-called supplementary governorship election in Imo state has left a sizeable section of us euphoric. The elections were adjudged as free, fair and credible, in spite of several allegations of ballot snatching and illegal thumb-printing of ballots and other fraudulent activities. This is understandable because of abyss to which we fell in the conduct of elections in 2007, and the general transparency with which the new leadership of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) conducted their affairs.
Another reason for the general euphoria is the apparent results, particularly, of the parliamentary and the presidential elections. The reduction in the dominance of the ruling Peoples Democratic Party at both houses of the National Assembly tended to lend credibility to the process and reflect our national plurality like never before since the 1980s. And then the election of a minority from the oil-rich Niger-Delta through votes garnered from both the southern and parts of northern Nigeria, is also widely seen as indicative of an emerging national consensus.
These all are truly concrete reasons for hope and rejoicing, or are they? I ask because, as I pointed out last time, it is already part of the sad irony of our contemporary history that a “free, fair and credible,” was followed by riots in a number of states in the North, leading to death in the hundreds, including those many young Nigerian patriots on national service away from their states of origin. The rhetoric that has accompanied our mourning of these heroes has, unfortunately laid wide open the tenuous nature of our claim to nationhood.
This was why I warned that “the of Unfolding events…must jar us from any smug assumption that all is well; that once we succeed in shouting down those we disagree with; or use state power, whether brazenly or subtly, to have our way, it’s all good.”
I referred specifically to the statement by Pastor Ayo Oritsejafor of the Christian Association of Nigeria, and the reactions to it by both the Congress for Progressive Change (CPC) and the Sultan of Sokoto over what is now known and called post-presidential election violence.
The CAN President had asked that the presidential candidate of the Congress for Progressive Change (CPC), Alhaji Muhammadu Buhari be arrested and prosecuted for complicity in the riots. He had also pointed out that the attack, during those riots, of Christians and Christian facilities betray a religious agenda, which needs to be firmly dealt with.
Yinka Odumakin, who spoke on behalf of CPC candidate Buhari, pointed out that his principal had already “distanced himself and the CPC from the mayhem severally and strongly condemned the burning of worship places and alleged killings of National Youth Service Corps (NYSC) members,” and that “nobody has brought out any contrary facts”, beyond what he described as, “false innuendos and character assassination which Oritsejafor has also been recruited into…” He went personal: “While we concede to the Villa Priest, who is widely believed to be a beneficiary of the rot that presently defines governance in Nigeria, the right to defend the tainted victory of the PDP, we frown at the use of the CAN mask to prosecute his Aso Rock brief…Our collective memory is not so short as not to know that unlike other revered men of God who have been on that exalted seat and spoke truth to power in the order of Samuel who put God’s command above the fat of oxen, we don’t have a quote of Oritsejafor on the unbridled corruption and open banditry that has been the defining rule of governance in the country….”
The Sultan of Sokoto and President-General, Nigerian Supreme Council for Islamic Affairs (NSCIA), Alhaji Muhammad Sa’ad Abubakar, who reacted through Secretary, Sultanate Council, Sokoto, Alhaji Bello Usman Dange, was more temperate. He dismissed “the insinuation by Pastor Oritsejafor that the post-election violence was a plot hatched by Muslims as part of their ‘religious agenda’, which merely took ‘advantage of the political situation’” as both preposterous and unfounded.”
He said religious leaders, were expected to preach tolerance and mutual understanding especially during times of crisis, and not to promote dissension and discord, calling on stakeholders, including leaders of thought from all parts of the country and representatives of the media to “exercise utmost caution and restraint in both their utterances and actions”. He stated that “we must not do anything that is capable of aggravating the situation. We must strive, at all times, to re-enforce the sanctity and inviolability of human life and work together to engender greater peace and understanding among our people”.
The statement continued: “The whole crisis was unfortunate. It was equally a great tragedy that the crisis took the turn it did, leading to the burning of both mosques and churches and to the unfortunate loss of life on both sides of the religious divide…But how can a Muslim Religious Agenda make human life easily expendable, including that of its sons and daughters? What have we got to gain as leaders by ordering the destruction of life and property of our co-religionists and disrupting the peace and mutual co-existence which we have all worked so hard to achieve?
“It is of paramount importance to remind Pastor Oritsejafor that a genuine search for peace should never be regarded as a tactical engagement, to be pursued only when it suits our immediate interests. It is a life-long commitment which we must all take seriously.
“We must extend our condolences to all those who have lost their loved ones in this mayhem and to commiserate with each and everyone who has been affected by the crisis. Gratuitous violence has never served any useful societal purpose. We can only exercise it at the detriment of ourselves and our society.”
When it is remembered that the Sultan and CAN president are co-chairmen of the National Inter-Religious Council (NIREC) and have to date spoken with one voice, this public disagreement is symptomatic of something deep., the implications of which we will try to examine next.
No comments:
Post a Comment