NIGERIA BELONGS TO ALL OF US
I have written this open letter to His Eminence, Alhaji Muhammad Sa’ad Abubakar III, CFR, mni, Sultan of Sokoto and President-General of the Nigerian Supreme Council for Islamic Affairs, with profound respect for his office and for the historic institution he represents.
This is not an attack on Islam, neither an attack on Christianity.
Also, It is not an attempt to diminish the historical importance of the Sultanate, rather, it is a sincere contribution to a conversation I believe Nigeria must have with greater honesty, courage and intellectual maturity:
What does equal citizenship mean in Nigeria?
Our country has a complex history involving kingdoms, caliphates, indigenous political systems, colonialism, amalgamation, independence, religion, ethnicity and competing political traditions.
But after all that history, one question remains fundamental:
Who does Nigeria belong to? My answer is simple:
Nigeria belongs to all Nigerians.
I am publishing this letter openly because I believe conversations of this magnitude should not be confined to private rooms.
I hope it reaches His Eminence.
More importantly, I hope it reaches Nigerians—Muslims and Christians alike—who believe that our future must be built on equal citizenship, mutual respect, constitutional democracy and a shared sense of belonging.
I invite people to read this letter in that spirit.
Not as a provocation or as a religious argument. But as an invitation to think.
AN OPEN LETTER TO HIS EMINENCE, ALHAJI MUHAMMAD SA’AD ABUBAKAR III, CFR, mni
SULTAN OF SOKOTO AND PRESIDENT-GENERAL, NIGERIAN SUPREME COUNCIL FOR ISLAMIC AFFAIRS
Your Eminence,
OUR HISTORY MUST BE REMEMBERED HONESTLY—BUT IT MUST NOT BECOME A CLAIM ON THE FUTURE
Nigeria’s history contains great Muslim civilisations and political institutions.
Kanem-Bornu, the Hausa states and the Sokoto Caliphate represent important chapters in the history of the territories that eventually became Nigeria.
The Sokoto Caliphate, in particular, became one of the most influential Islamic political formations in West Africa.
That history deserves recognition and respect.
But history presents us with an important question:
Does historical political authority confer permanent political ownership?
I believe the answer must be no.
The British colonial conquest and occupation of the territories that now constitute Nigeria occurred over decades, with the conquest of the Sokoto Caliphate culminating in 1903. The Northern and Southern Protectorates were subsequently amalgamated in 1914, and Nigeria achieved independence in 1960.
Whatever political arrangements existed before colonial consolidation, the Nigeria that emerged as a modern sovereign state ultimately became a constitutional republic in which citizenship could not legitimately be based upon the political history of one religion, ethnic group, kingdom or region.
Nigeria became something larger than all of those histories.
It became a country.
And that country belongs equally to the Muslim, the Christian, the adherent of another faith, and the citizen who professes no religion.
Your Eminence, Nigeria’s Constitution does not establish either Islam or Christianity as the religion of the Nigerian state.
Section 10 provides that:
“The Government of the Federation or of a State shall not adopt any religion as State Religion.”
Section 38 protects freedom of thought, conscience and religion.
Section 42 further provides constitutional protection against discrimination on the basis of religion, among other grounds.
These provisions are not merely legal technicalities. They represent an important national compact.
They establish principles of religious neutrality, religious freedom and equal citizenship.
They tell every Nigerian that his or her fundamental rights cannot legitimately depend upon belonging to the “right” religion.
That principle protects Muslims from Christian majoritarianism just as it protects Christians from Muslim majoritarianism.
And therefore, defending constitutional religious neutrality is not an attack on Islam neither an attack on Christianity.
It is protection for both.
THE DIFFICULT QUESTION OF POLITICAL SYMBOLISM
Your Eminence, this is where I believe our national conversation requires greater intellectual honesty.
A political arrangement can have two realities simultaneously:
its strategic reality and its symbolic reality.
Strategically, politicians may see a particular political ticket as an effective coalition, an electoral calculation, a mechanism for consolidating support or a means of improving political cohesion.
But citizens may interpret exactly the same arrangement symbolically.
They may ask:
Who is represented?
Who is included?
Who is excluded?
What does this say about the distribution of power?
What does this mean for people like me?
This distinction became particularly visible in Nigeria’s debate over the Muslim-Muslim presidential ticket.
Some citizens saw strategy while others saw symbolism.
Some saw political competence, Others saw the possibility of religious exclusion.
Both reactions can exist simultaneously.
A mature democracy must therefore be capable of understanding not only what a political arrangement is, but also what people believe that arrangement means.
This is not an argument against Muslims occupying political office nor should it be an argument against Christians occupying political office.
It is an argument for understanding the enormous responsibility that comes with political symbolism in a deeply religious society.
Political leaders must therefore understand that electoral strategy does not exist in a vacuum. Every political decision is interpreted through the lived experiences, fears, hopes and historical memories of the citizens who encounter it.
That is why responsible leadership requires both strategic intelligence and sensitivity to political meaning.
The Muslim citizen must not feel like a tolerated Nigerian, neither should the Christian.
This is perhaps the most important principle I wish to communicate.
A Christian should never have to feel that his citizenship is conditional upon political accommodation by Muslims. A Muslim should never have to feel that his citizenship is conditional upon political accommodation by Christians.
Neither should have to prove that his loyalty to Nigeria is greater than his loyalty to his faith.
Both should be able to say:
“Nigeria is my country, and nobody needs to give me permission to belong here.”
That is the Nigeria we should be building.
Your Eminence, traditional and religious leaders occupy a unique position in Nigerian society.
Political leaders come and go.
Governments change.
Political parties rise and fall.
But institutions such as the Sultanate carry historical memory.
That gives your words a different weight.
When a politician speaks about religion, Nigerians may suspect political calculation but when a respected religious leader speaks about coexistence, citizenship and national unity, the message can carry a moral authority that politics often cannot achieve.
This is why I believe the Sultanate has an extraordinary opportunity.
Not merely to speak for Muslims, But to speak to Nigeria.
To say clearly that the greatness of Islam in Nigeria does not require the political diminishment of Christianity. And equally, that the flourishing of Christianity in Nigeria does not require the political diminishment of Islam.
The strength of one faith should not require the weakness of another.
The security of one community should not depend upon the insecurity of another.
And the political advancement of one Nigerian should never require the political humiliation of another Nigerian simply because of religion.
WE SHOULD MOVE BEYOND THE COMPETITION FOR RELIGIOUS OWNERSHIP OF NIGERIA
There is a dangerous psychological temptation in deeply divided societies.
Each community begins to measure its security by the amount of power the other community possesses.
Then politics becomes a permanent struggle for religious arithmetic.
Who has the President?
Who has the Vice President?
Who controls the security institutions?
Who appoints judges?
Who controls the legislature?
Who controls the governors?
Who controls the economy?
And eventually, citizens stop asking the most important question:
Does the country work for everyone?
That is where we must break the cycle.
Nigeria cannot become great by producing a permanent contest between Muslim political power and Christian political power.
It can become great when both communities begin demanding something larger:
competent political power exercised for the common good.
The ultimate measure of political leadership should not be the religion of the person holding office.
It should be the quality of governance, the protection of citizens, the fairness of institutions, the security of communities and the opportunity available to every Nigerian.
PERHAPS OUR GREATEST NATIONAL TEST IS NOT RELIGIOUS DOMINANCE—BUT MUTUAL TRUST
Your Eminence, I believe Nigeria’s deepest problem is not simply that Muslims distrust Christians or Christians distrust Muslims.
It is that decades of political competition, violence, injustice, insecurity, corruption and unequal experiences of citizenship have created an enormous deficit of trust.
Religious suspicion is often the language through which that distrust expresses itself.
Therefore, if we want to defeat religious tension, we must do more than preach tolerance.
We must build institutions that make tolerance unnecessary as a condition of citizenship.
A Nigerian should not need to be tolerated.
He should simply be equal.
A Christian should not need a Muslim’s permission to belong.
A Muslim should not need a Christian’s permission to belong.
Our common citizenship should be the foundation upon which our religious differences are accommodated—not the other way around.
Your Eminence, I respectfully propose that Nigeria’s most respected Muslim and Christian leaders begin a different kind of conversation.
Not another conference where speeches are made and photographs taken.
But a serious national dialogue around five questions:
- What does equal citizenship actually mean in Nigeria?
- How should religious diversity influence political representation without becoming a mechanism for religious entitlement?
- How do we distinguish legitimate political strategy from symbolism that creates unnecessary fear or exclusion?
- How can traditional and religious institutions help rebuild trust between communities?
- What constitutional, institutional and political reforms are necessary to ensure that no Nigerian believes the country belongs more to another citizen than to himself?
These are difficult questions. But perhaps Nigeria has spent too many decades avoiding difficult questions because they are uncomfortable. And perhaps the price of that avoidance is becoming too high.
Your Eminence, history gives leaders a choice.
Every generation inherits history. But every generation also decides what to do with it.
We can use history as a weapon or wisdom
We can teach our children that Nigeria is a battlefield between religious communities.
Or we can teach them that Muslims and Christians inherited a complicated country together and have the responsibility to make it work together.
We can continue competing over who has the greater historical claim.
Or we can build a country where historical claims do not determine the value of a citizen.
I respectfully believe the latter is worthy of the office you occupy.
The greatest legacy of a historical institution is not merely that it preserves the memory of what once was.
It is that it helps a nation decide what it can become.
My final appeal Your Eminence, I do not ask you to abandon Islam.
I ask you to help Nigerians understand that Islam does not need Nigeria to belong exclusively to Muslims for Muslims to belong completely to Nigeria.
And I would say the same to Christian leaders:
Christianity does not need Nigeria to belong exclusively to Christians for Christians to belong completely to Nigeria.
The future must therefore be bigger than both arguments.
Nigeria must belong to Nigerians.
Not to Muslims.
Not to Christians.
Not to Hausa, Yoruba, Igbo, Tiv, Fulani, Igala, Idoma, Nupe, or any other ethnic nationality.
Not to the North.
Not to the South.
Not to one historical institution.
To all of us.
That, in my humble view, is the foundation upon which a truly united Nigeria can eventually be built.
I respectfully submit this thought to Your Eminence—not as an accusation, but as an invitation to a deeper national conversation.
May our religious differences become a source of moral strength rather than political division.
May our history become a source of wisdom rather than entitlement.
May our political differences never become a justification for denying one another’s citizenship.
And may the Nigeria we leave our children be a country in which neither Muslim nor Christian ever has to ask:
“Does this country belong to me?”
Because the answer should always be:“Yes. It is your country too.”
With profound respect,
Dr. Mike Achadu
A Nigerian Citizen