Connect with us

Opinion

North, Shiites and Quest for Tolerance

Published

3 years ago

on

 

By Adamu Tilde

Today in northern Nigeria, we live in critically challenging times, with our cultural harmony rapidly disappearing and our political unity fast disintegrating, leaving social and political vacuums that are now hotly contested by two mutually-rejecting, nihilistic tendencies, each equally vicious and destructive. One does not require a Mensa IQ to conclude that our society is dangerously tethering on the edge of the precipice, heading inexorably towards a disaster. Our culture, our history, and our civilization are under threat. The way we handle those existential challenges today determines how posterity will treat us tomorrow.

This piece is conceived in fear and borne out of desperation. Fear over the north’s steady descent into sectarian abyss, and the desperation to arrest this slide before it is too late, before we are all consumed by it. Therefore, in diagnosing our problems and proffering solutions, I do not intend to surrender ourselves to the self-imposed tyranny of political correctness that often characterize discussions such as this.

The recent sectarian mob violence targeted against the northern Shia minority should enrage any believer in justice and freedom. That appalling display of lawlessness and barbarism must be unreservedly condemned by everyone. It is bereft of any legal, moral or social justification. Those angry mobs who cheerfully lynched their fellow citizens and torched and looted their properties have desecrated the very religion (or values) they are claiming to protect, and the clerics who silently or loudly abetted such travesty have betrayed their calling as men of peace.

It is beyond the scope of this piece to trace the historical root of the Sunni-Shia antagonism in Nigeria, but the Shia-military clashes of 2014 that led to the death of Zakzaky’s three children is a watershed in the timelines of events that led us to where we are today. That tragic encounter set the stage for a more tragic one the year after, that saw hundreds of Nigerians perished and billions worth of properties damaged, further deteriorating the already fragile sectarian stability and bringing our peoples closer to sectarian civil war.

#

I do not intend to make light of the Shiites crimes and transgressions, both real and imagined. Granted therefore, that the Shiites stand guilty of sectarian incitement, provocation, road blockage and wanton disregard for law and order, but no Nigerian sect or party can claim innocence on all those charges, and under our laws and norms, none of those crimes carries the price of a death penalty. Human life, according to all secular and religious conventions, is sacred, and no one has the right to take any life without recourse to law, to judicial due process, except in cases of obvious self-defense. But in Nigeria, putting the sacred tag on each soul does not prevent the next Shiites from being lynched in our streets, or the next petty thief from being lynched in our markets. Extrajudicial killings have become a Nigerian hobby and our failure to do anything qualifies as acquiescence, as an indictment on our collective humanity and pretend religiosity.

More disheartening however, is the tendency of Nigerians to view crimes through partisan and sectarian prisms. The Shia clashes of 2014 and 2015 are two cases in points. Our partisan social media commentators found it politic to describe the tragic Shia clashes of 2014 as a Jonathanian massacre of defenseless Shiites by the genocidal Jonathanian army, but the more tragic one of 2015 as a Shia provocation against the almighty Nigerian army. To them, justice and fairness is directly proportional to the prevailing political reality and not facts on ground. And therefore, those who condemned the tragedy of 2014 become the staunch legitimizers of the travesty of 2015. Nothing can be more absurd!

If the political partisans are guilty of reducing human life to a political commodity based on defined exigencies, the sectarian partisans are even worse, for they not only legitimize the violence against the Shia minority, they also equate every sympathy for the victims and any criticism against the perpetrators to a sin resembling apostasy. In doing that, they succeed in silencing every dissenting voice for justice and fairness and provide a veneer of popular support to their acts of treacherous inhumanity. Many have tried to strike a balance between condemning the Shiites and the actions of the military by drawing an imaginary ethical equivalence between alleged lawbreakers (the Shiites) and constitutionally mandated law-enforcers (the security agencies). But there is no moral equivalence nor ethical symmetry. There is only one denominator here, which is that of Nigerian lives being wantonly wasted without any recourse to judicial process or rule of law, and that a sizeable majority of Nigerians are either happy or indifferent. And the fact that such violence finds support among educated northerners speak volumes about our appalling bigotry and intolerance.

This culture of hate, intolerance and inter-sectarian suspicions bodes ill for interfaith and intrafaith relationships. As Sunnis, our children are taught to hate the Shiite-other, and Shiites are taught to hate the Sunni-other. Those indoctrinations subliminally paint the other as violent, conspiratorial and demagogic, and therefore incapable of peaceful coexistence and undeserving of our respect, tolerance and understanding. By doing this, we forget or negate one of the basic principles of our own faith where diversity is seeing as a manifest of a divine design and guidance as a function of divine will.

The Shiites, like every other religious sect, have their peculiar problems and shortcomings. Their contempt for secular authorities and open disregard for law and order are affronts to their constitutional obligations and to the fundamental rights of other citizens. However, to shun all other sides and tell the world that the Shiites are the most violent and intolerant speaks well of our ideological hypocrisy. Because, statistics have shown that violence against the Shiites are more than those perpetrated by the sect. But because of our inherent bias, there is the tendency to underreport violence against them and amplify those perpetrated by their adherents, and thereby exaggerating their villainy and watering down the facts of Shia victimhood.

It is easy to condemn the Shiites as being misguided, forgetting that religious text and injunctions are subject to interpretation. The solution therefore, lies in scholarly discourse and not scholarly scorn because the problem is rooted in the erroneous belief that it is only our interpretation that is correct and legitimate, foreclosing the chance of further dialogue.

We can achieve this by practicing our religions with “… Lakum dinukum wa liya deen: To you your way, and to me mine” on our mind, by believing in what we believe without calling each other names and declaring each other heretics/apostates or wanting them dead, by living in peace, harmony and understanding with one another, through mutual respect, and without belittling each other’s belief system.

We should let our education and training not only reflect our social media profiles and professional citations, but also reflect our character and behavior. Because, education is meant to free us from our own prejudices, from our own insanities. Education should not only make us employable and rich, education should make us a better, loving, and peaceful people. Education should help us embrace and respect all humans regardless of race, ethnicity, ideology or religion; we should work towards making the world a better place, not ruining it by our actions and inactions.

Therefore, we must all rise up against this sectarian challenge. We must dismantle all barriers to dialogue and eliminate all those factors that promote sectarian tension and radicalization, especially for our youth. De-radicalization, like charity, must begin at home, with the very clerics whom their respective sectarian adherents look up to for guidance and inspiration. With dissension and rebellion being part of the Shia DNA throughout its troubled history, the IMN, as the largest representative of Nigerian Shiites must re-evolve itself and commit to conducting its activities in a legally responsible and socially constructive manner.

Above all, government should be concerned about the types of ideologies openly preached. We must strike a balance between fundamental human rights and collective national interests, by working towards entrenching justice and respecting and protecting the fundamental human rights of all Nigerians, irrespective of the God they worship or ideology they profess, in a way that does not harm the collective peace and stability of our people. Unless we achieve this, Northern Nigeria will be on the path to sectarian chaos, the path of Afghanistan, Iraq and Pakistan. Through education and dialogue, agreeing with Nelson Mandela, we can be able to achieve that peaceful, accommodating, developing, flourishing and promising [Northern] Nigeria. Like minds, let us embark on this mission in every possible way we can. It will take a long time to complete, but let us remember Lao Tzu’s epic one-liner: a journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step.

First published October 2016.

– Adamu Tilde can be reached at adamtilde@gmail.com

Related Topics:

Opinion

Clarification On Recent Events During The Eid-El-Fitr Celebration In Kano: A Response To The GiGG’s Malicious Statement

Published

20 hours ago

on

April 1, 2025

By

Clarification On Recent Events During The Eid-El-Fitr Celebration In Kano: A Response To The GiGG’s Malicious Statement

In light of the recent malicious statement issued by the Global Initiatives for Good Governance (GIGG), which disrespects constituted authority and has the potential to cause uncertainty and security breaches regarding the events during the Eid-el-Fitr celebrations in Kano, it is important to provide clarification regarding the actions of both the Emir of Kano, Mallam Muhammadu Sanusi II, and Governor HE. Abba Kabir Yusuf.

First and foremost, it is essential to clarify that there was no Durbar held during this Eid celebration. Rather, what took place was the Emir’s procession to and from the Eid prayer at Kofar Mata, located outside the eastern city wall. This procession is a long-standing Islamic tradition (Sunnah), which involves taking a different route from the one followed to the prayer ground when returning. The Emir’s procession, limited to his guards and close officials, followed this practice in accordance with Islamic traditions. Unlike the Durbar, which is a formal parade involving district heads and traditional horse riders symbolizing allegiance to the Emir and the Emirate, this procession was conducted with full attention to both tradition and public safety.

#

Durbar celebrations, as historically practiced, have not been held regularly in recent years, mainly due to concerns from security forces. The recent event was no exception. Both the Emir and the Governor acted with the intention of striking a balance between preserving cultural practices and ensuring the safety and security of the public. They did not disregard the law or public safety, rather, their actions were aimed at preventing the potential exploitation of the occasion by individuals seeking to disrupt peace and stability.

The breakdown of law and order that occurred was due to the actions of alleged, sponsored criminal elements who hijacked the occasion to create chaos. These individuals sought to tarnish the reputations of both the Emir and the Governor, possibly even attempting to blackmail them and state. We commend the Nigeria Police Force for their swift action in making arrests, which is an important step toward uncovering the full extent of the individuals and networks behind these destructive activities.

It is also essential to address the concerns raised by the faceless NGO. While the police do not have the constitutional authority to outrightly ban traditional programs such as this, they are within their rights to call for a suspension or cancellation based on actionable intelligence aimed at maintaining public safety. Any formal ban, however, would require adherence to due legal process.

The nation is now closely watching the Nigeria Police Force, and we are hopeful that justice will be served swiftly. We trust that ongoing investigations will identify all those responsible for these disruptive actions and ensure accountability.

A.T. Abdullahi
A Concerned Kano Indigene
31st March 2025

Continue Reading

Opinion

Periscoping Waiya’s Alleged Assault on Free Press Viz the Preponderance of Mob Reasoning

Published

6 days ago

on

March 27, 2025

By

 

By Al Amin Ubandoma

The recent controversy surrounding Kano State Commissioner for Information, Ambassador Ibrahim Waiya, has sparked heated debates about free press and mob reasoning. The controversy began with an opinionated article written by one Auwalu Ismail, which criticized Waiya that was widely circulated online.

The article contained allegedly malicious and defamatory statements about Ambassador Ibrahim Waiya. As a public figure, Waiya has the right to defend himself against such attacks, and his decision to report the matter to the police was a legitimate exercise of this right.

However, the response from journalists and Amnesty International was swift and merciless. Without recourse to the violation of Waiya’s rights, they condemned his actions as an assault on free press and a threat to democracy.

This mob-like response is a classic example of mob reasoning, where emotions and sensationalism override rational thinking and fairness.

#

The implications of this response are far-reaching. If public figures like Ambassador Ibrahim Waiya are not allowed to defend themselves against malicious attacks, it could create a culture of impunity where anyone can make false and defamatory statements without consequence.

Furthermore, the response from journalists and Amnesty International undermines the principles of fairness and justice as enshrined in journalistic ethics.

By failing to consider Waiya’s side of the story and his right to defend himself, Amnesty international, and its co-travellers perpetuated a one-sided narrative that ignored the complexities of the issue at stake.

The controversy surrounding Waiya highlights the need for fairness and balance in public discourse. While free press is essential to democracy, it is equally important to protect the rights and privileges of public figures like Ambassador Waiya.

By prioritizing fairness and justice, we can create a more equitable and just society for all. This requires a commitment to considering multiple perspectives and upholding the rights and privileges of all individuals, including public figures.

The mob-like response from journalists and Amnesty International is a reminder that even in the pursuit of press freedom, we must not trample on the rights of others.

Indeed, Ambassador Waiya’s experience serves as a cautionary tale about the dangers of mob reasoning and the importance of upholding fairness and justice in public discourse.

As we move forward, it is essential that we learn from Waiya’s experience and prioritize fairness and balance in public discourse. This requires a commitment to considering multiple perspectives and upholding the rights and privileges of all individuals.

The protection of human rights is essential to creating a just and equitable society. By upholding the rights and privileges of all individuals, including public figures like Waiya, we can create a more just and equitable society for all.

In conclusion, Ambassador Waiya’s experience serves as a powerful reminder of the importance of protecting the rights and privileges of all individuals, including public figures.

The debate surrounding Waiya’s actions is a reminder that the pursuit of press freedom is complex and multifaceted. While it is essential to protect the rights of journalists and writers, it is equally important to uphold the rights and privileges of public figures.

Ultimately, the controversy surrounding Waiya and the opinionated article highlights the need for a more nuanced and balanced approach to public discourse.

By prioritizing fairness and justice, we can create a more equitable and just society for all. This requires a commitment to considering multiple perspectives and upholding the rights and privileges of all individuals.

As we move forward, it is essential that we prioritize fairness and balance in public discourse. This requires a commitment to considering multiple perspectives and upholding the rights and privileges of all individuals.

The importance of protecting the rights and privileges of public figures like Ambassador Waiya cannot be overstated.

By upholding the rights and privileges of all individuals, including public figures, we can create a more just and equitable society for all.

In the end, Ambassador Waiya’s experience serves as a powerful reminder of the importance of prioritizing fairness and balance in public discourse, and it has indeed brought to fore how not to deployed mob reasoning on issues of human rights

Al Amin Ubandoma, a Public Affairs Analyst writes from Lagos.

Continue Reading

Opinion

Journalists: The Unseen Heroes of Development, Kano Desires Collaboration Not Confrontation

Published

7 days ago

on

March 26, 2025

By

 

BY AMINU BALA

By convention and practice, media houses and journalists have the right to express their opinions under guided principles, ethical compliance, and the rule of law.

The recent allegations surrounding the arrest and detention of two journalists in Kano State have sparked intense debate. However, it’s essential to set the record straight: the duo were only invited for questioning, not arrested or detained, for allegedly attacking the personality of Comrade Ibrahim Abdullahi Waiya, Kano State Commissioner for Information and Internal Affairs in one online media platform, Kano Times titled “Dear Governor Abba Kabir, .Beware of Waiya”.

Some critics argue that the police’s invitation for questioning was improper. Amnesty International, in particular as a reputable organization, appears to have jumped to conclusions without proper due diligence by condemning the police invitation, describing it as a threat to free press.

It’s crucial to verify facts before making conclusions, and Amnesty should ensure they present accurate information to maintain their credibility. It was clear that Amnesty didn’t balance findings as one of the guided principles of journalism. According to Amnesty, it heard the tidings break from the grapevine.

To this extent, Amnesty, as a reputable organization, failed to verify information through official channels, thereby perpetuating misinformation and undermining its reputation. This lack of due diligence raises questions about Amnesty International’s commitment to accuracy and fairness. It’s crucial to verify facts before making conclusions, and Amnesty should ensure they present accurate information to maintain their credibility.

#

In this case, Amnesty International’s hasty condemnation of the police invitation of the two suspects was premature and unwarranted. By failing to engage with an official source, as it appears, its impromptu action spurs unnecessary tension.

It is common knowledge that the Kano State Government has no issues with media houses or journalists. Instead, it recognises the critical role journalists play in promoting development and accountability as encapsulated in the 1999 Constitution as amended, which guarantees Press Freedom in Section 39 (1) and (2).Additionally, Section 22 guarantees the freedom of the press.

Against the odd, Amnesty must take steps to address its methodology and credibility concerns. This includes engaging with official sources, verifying information through multiple channels, and avoiding hasty conclusions and condemnation. Only by so doing can the organization regain its credibility as impartial human rights advocate.

The State government, in particular, acknowledges journalists as major stakeholders, bedrocks, and pillars of democracy and is committed to transparency and accountability. Collaboration, not confrontation, is the way forward. By working together, the government and journalists can provide essential information to the public, addressing the “oils and waters” of development challenges.

Naturally, every human on the surface of the earth might have or develop some glaring err, so Waiya is not an exception. It’s only God the Supreme that doesn’t err, As a vibrant human rights advocate, activist, and media acquaintance, Waiya possesses the enigmatic leadership skills to transform the journalism profession With his exceptional stamina, he is poised to re-energize and revitalize the industry and take it to new heights. As a seasoned media acquaintance and advocate, Waiya brings a unique blend of expertise, passion, and commitment to bear on his job. His leadership is a beacon of hope for a more robust, responsible, and respected journalism profession in Kano State.

As Waiya navigates the complexities of his new role, he should remain steadfast in his dedication to the principles of journalism, human rights, and democracy. His unwavering commitment to the truth, coupled with his exceptional leadership skills, makes him an exemplary figure in the journalism profession. With Waiya at the helm, the future of journalism in Kano State looks brighter than ever.

In conclusion, to cut the story short, the K
It is instructive to note that the Kano State Government values the role of journalists in promoting development and accountability. With guided principles and a commitment to transparency, the government is eager to collaborate with media houses and journalists to drive progress in Kano State.

Aminu writes from Kano

Continue Reading

Trending