₦airaland Forum

It pleases me to know that faithlessness is slowly getting acknowledged in the mainstream media, even if just as an opinion piece.

Abimbola Adelakun: President Muhammadu Buhari will go down in history as one of the worst managed presidents Nigeria ever had when it is evaluated on the basis of effective and strategic communication. The problem is not a shortage of personnel to carry out the necessary tasks of reaching the Nigerian public. No, the problem is he is managed by an incompetent team that thinks its highest duty is to write tepid press releases. His media team generally appears to lack initiative, and in a desperate bid to outshine one other, they embarrassingly contradict themselves when they (eventually) communicate with the public.

Due to them, the Presidency has been subjected to a needless ridicule. The latest of their sins is about the press release issued by the Presidency after the barbaric murder of a certain Mrs Bridget Agbahime. The woman was killed by a Muslim mob in Kano over allegations of blasphemy.
There are a number of howlers in that press release, none that should have come from the Presidency.

One was to refer to the victim as an “Igbo market woman in Kano.” Considering that we are all citizens of “One Nigeria” why make a reference to her ethnic group? Was that a sly suggestion that she occupied a space she does not belong? Saying “An Igbo woman in Kano” presupposes that her citizenship and constitutionally guaranteed right to live in Kano are both contestable. It is a crying shame that even the Federal Government could not look past tribe and let their eyes rest on her Nigerianness. Instead, they “reduced” her to another Igbo woman.

The press release added that “When law and order breaks down, those who become victims are never distinguished on the basis of religion or ethnicity.” This is another desperate attempt to efface the possibility that the victim was picked on because of religion and ethnicity, and her death was not merely circumstantial. Indeed, her death came about as a result of a breakdown of law and order but the perpetrators were not confused about the identity politics that drove them to murder her in such gruesome circumstances. Claiming that in the midst of a breakdown of law and order, we are all liable to become victims erases the reality of people who, during mass riots, were specifically targeted in many mass riots for their religion and ethnicity. This effort to minimise the political context of those killings is an obtuse form of political correctness that panders to the sentiment of those who kill and their enablers who – like Pontius Pilate – wash their hands off their culpability and watch the murder happen. If the murderers and perpetrators do not select their victims in the various riots and attacks that had taken place in the past, then, how come the victims are almost always of a certain demographic? And how come the aggressors’ demographic is so predictable?

Another major gaffe – and this one has been picked up by a number of commentators – is the part of the press release that suggests that the woman deserved her death. The release said, Let us learn to respect each other’s faith, so that we can know each other and live together in peace.”

This is a most tactless thing to say considering the circumstances in which Madam Agbahime died. For one, it presumes that the woman died because she overstepped her bounds by allegedly blaspheming. If she had expressed more respect, she would have been alive among others. That is a form of victim blaming that displaces the blame from the murderous maniacs and locates it on the poor woman.

The other reason that clause in the press release is problematic is that it accommodates the idea of blasphemy, and that it should be indulged and honoured as a legitimate wrong. This is anti-democratic and in fact, a thoughtless intervention. Like a number of Nigerians, the President – and his media aide who drafted the release – took it for granted that the only people who occupy Nigeria border space are the people who profess one faith or the other. In Nigeria, by the way, to profess faith largely means to be either a Christian or a Muslim. All other faiths, minority and marginal, have their basic rights regularly (and unapologetically) eroded by these two dominant ones who tend to assume Nigeria was made for them only.

The Nigerian state, while not constitutionally allowed to recognise any religion in official capacity, caters to these two religions. We see this in the contestation that accompanies electioneering in Nigeria, state sponsorship of pilgrimages, and the willingness of political office holders to identify with one religion or the other. The existence of other religion is easily forgotten and even worse, there is no acknowledgement of people who have no faith to profess. For instance, the “faith” of an atheist is non-faith, a non-belief that negates the faith of the believer. By asking us to respect each other’s faith, we leave behind those who have no faith or those who do not fall under the umbrella of Christianity and Islam. If we get to know others more by respecting the faith of others, how do we propose to live in peace with the atheists or non-theists whose “non-faith” is inherently blasphemous?

That is why there should not be an indulgence of the possibility that faith can be blasphemed, or that “respect” for other people’s faith is a recipe for mutual co-existence. Apart from the inherent falsehood for that statement, it is worth noting that respect for faith must be balanced with respect for non-faith as well. The Director of MURIC, Prof Ishaq Akintola, reasoned that even if blasphemy had been committed, she should have been taken to a police station rather than be savagely attacked. Again, that kind of thought process is exceedingly problematic. If she did not believe in their God to either exalt him, she should not have to shut her mouth to avoid allegations of blasphemy. People should not have to believe nor pander to those who believe so that they can keep their lives. That is a terrible form of dehumanisation and a violation of their constitutional rights.

Currently, a number of people are on death row in the same Kano State where the Agbahime incident occurred, convicted by the Sharia Court for the sin of blasphemy. The Federal Government should intervene and see to it that those people are promptly freed. Their trial process is a meaningless one. It does not make sense that they be punished for not giving any regard to another person’s belief or faith. Under Islamic law and in an Islamic state, that kind of totalitarianism may make sense to those who are willing to abide by such dictates. To those of us who have chosen to live under a democracy, there can be nothing like blasphemy. Anyone who wants to protect their god from criticism should hide them in a private vault. All gods – as long as they are unleashed to roam in the public sphere, as long as taxpayers’ money is used to fund their rituals, as long as they are in our faces – are fair game for both ridicule and reverence. Those who blasphemed God with their mouths are also expressing their rights to free speech. How do you punish them for one and retain the other? If God wanted them dead, he has enough machinery at his disposal to kill them dead by himself.

Punch Newspaper

sigh...tell dem o

they score us first. Hausa 1-0 Igbo ....i promise u dat it's gonna b 1-1 full time

AgentOfAllah:
It pleases me to know that faithlessness is slowly getting acknowledged in the mainstream media, even if just as an opinion piece.


Punch Newspaper

but y is it DAT anytime a Hausa man was killed in d east nobody says anything but ones and Igbo person is killed in d north den u term it as religion killing, y?

AgentOfAllah:
It pleases me to know that faithlessness is slowly getting acknowledged in the mainstream media, even if just as an opinion piece.


Punch Newspaper

but y is it DAT anytime a Hausa man is killed in d east nobody says anything but ones and Igbo person is killed in d north den u term it as religion killing, y?

salam1:
but y is it DAT anytime a Hausa man was killed in d east nobody says anything but ones and Igbo person is killed in d north den u term it as religion killing, y?

How many times has an eastern mob specifically attacked people of a different ethnicity because some Foreign magazine that is unrelated to the victims 'blasphemed' against their religion? Make no mistake, the problem is not the existence of people that are impulsively violent. These exist everywhere in the world! The problem is the culture that enables and even encourages impulsive violence.

Another thing that worries me is that some people think such a crime as blasphemy should exist. I've read some terrifying half hearted condemnations of the action of the mob from Muslims, even on this forum, where the person asserts that the mob was wrong to kill the woman, not because condemning someone to death for 'blasphemy' is inherently wrong, but because the judgement was not pronounced by a sanctioned Islamic judge. This makes me very concerned about the mindset of these people, and these are meant to be the saner, educated lot!

It makes one wonder why their supposedly gafur'ul raheem (the most forgiving and most merciful) god is such a touchy feely coward whose most remarkable power is compelling humans, whether as certified Islamic judges or a group of illiterate mob, to satisfy its bloodlust. Such majesty and forgiveness!

geraldmezi:
they score us first. Hausa 1-0 Igbo ....i promise u dat it's gonna b 1-1 full time

What are you going to do? Behead a Hausa person? Don't be foolish!

geraldmezi:
they score us first. Hausa 1-0 Igbo ....i promise u dat it's gonna b 1-1 full time

lol... chestbeating as usual