RELIGION AND PEACE

          At the end of its meeting in Ilorin, Kwara State, the Nigeria Inter-Religious Council (N.I.R.E.C) warned religious preachers against inflaming passion and provoking their followers and feed the current levels of violence and insecurity in the country. The Secretary of the Council read a communiqué which noted that reckless preaching ignites crisps, and calls for dialogue as a tool for building and sustaining peace in Nigeria. NIREC observed that traditional and religious leaders have a major role to play in building peace among and between communities.

The communiqué of NIREC said nothing that the government-funded religions and traditional rulers forum has not said before. The plea of religious and traditional rulers to preachers or clerics who ordinarily should be within their sphere of influence to lower their profiles confirm what has long been suspected by most Nigerians: they have lost control over those who are most intimately involved in linking Nigerians with their faith and politics. The leadership of NIREC will not accept this, of course, and the Federal Government which sees NIREC as a major avenue for mediating relations between Nigerian muslims and christians will persist in its assumption that enduring peace between major religious and communities will be secured by people who are largely responsible for the problem. N.I.R.E.C’s Communiqué make a mockery of the standing of traditional rulers and religions leaders because once outside the forum, the apex of this organisation routinely engages in inflaming passions around faith and politics. The public quarrels over the operation of Ja’iz Bank, the tendencies to take pre-determined positions around ethno-religious crises; blatant incursions of religious leaders into the partisan political space as foot soldiers of politicians, and the many unreported but dangerously divisive preachings and other activities which occur daily in our churches and mosques all erode the credibility and capacity of religious leaders in the minds of simple christian and muslim folk. In most instances, leaders say one thing during meetings of NIREC, and completely the opposite when they talk to people of their own faith. It does little justice to their positions when they do this; and the general perception is that NIREC is merely a forum where religions and traditional leaders say what governments want to hear.

The current levels of mistrust and hostility between muslims and christians in many parts of Nigeria, particularly the north, will not be solved by periodic meetings of NIREC. The intimate relationship between faith and political partisanship in many states of the federation is a major source of insecurity and a threat to long-term economic and social development. Many political bases are being erected on the alter of religion; and many members of the clergy have built large followings around patently political activities. At this stage, it is obvious that demands that religion and politics should be separated in Nigeria are both ill-informed and hypocritical. Nigeria may be operating a secular constitution, but Nigerians are very religious people who see their faith in everything they do. Competition for scares resources and political power has used faith very much as a vehicle, and the problem is more acute in plural north, which has multiple religions and tribes. Once relationships between religious and ethnic communities break down, it is difficult to rebuild them, unless the leadership is able to stand above the divide which, unfortunately our current leaders are unable to do.

The damage to social cohesion and security done by clerics who inflame passions around religion and region is immense. The political space, unfortunately, has been take up by this group, and it is not likely to yield ground which gives it much power and little responsibility. The Nigerian state can mitigate the damage by effectively mediating relations between muslims and christians with more effective methods. It will need to raise its levels of vigilance and responsiveness to grievances and potentials for conflict around issues which provide the sources of conflict. It needs to identify inherent and endemic sources of these conflicts, and establish a machinery for their resolution. Issues in the constitution relating to indigene and settler status; settlement patterns; traditional rulership and cultural issues; access to employment and economic resources and treatment of persons who are responsible for breaches of peace or violence must be taken up with more seriousness. Poverty, rampant corruption and unemployment among the youth particularly feed frustrations, and create easy targets and available enemies, since leaders who are responsible for them are beyond reach.

If the federal government believes that N.I.R.E.C is a useful tool for creating religious harmony in Nigeria, it should continue to support and fund it. But it should demand higher levels of responsibility and commitment to genuine inter-religions harmony from leaders who should set standards of behaviour. It should measure the effectiveness of the Council by the degree to which it succeeds in reducing inter-religions conflicts and tension; and it should create some distance between itself and the Council. This way, when traditional and religious leaders set benchmarks or standards, both lower-level clerics and faithfuls will comply.