Follow Us on Google
By Paul Nwosu
Sheikh Sani Jingir’s open call for another Muslim-Muslim presidential ticket in 2027 is more than a personal political preference. It is a disturbing signal that what was presented in 2023 as an exceptional political calculation is gradually being projected as the new normal in Nigeria’s electoral politics.
That should worry every Nigerian who believes in the country’s secular constitutional order.
Nigeria is not a theocracy. It is not an Islamic Republic. Nor is it a Christian state. It is a plural, multi-religious federation whose stability depends on a delicate balance of inclusion, mutual respect and accommodation. That is precisely why the Muslim-Muslim ticket generated such intense controversy in 2023. Many Nigerians accepted it, not because they agreed with it, but because they were persuaded that national peace was preferable to deepening religious divisions. Unfortunately, that restraint appears to have been interpreted by some political and religious actors as acquiescence.
Jingir’s latest declaration suggests that what was defended as a temporary political strategy has now become, in some circles, an ideological project to be repeated indefinitely. His exhortation that Muslims should once again rally behind a Muslim-Muslim ticket reflects a mindset that religious dominance in presidential politics is both acceptable and desirable. That proposition, I daresay, is dangerous.
The reactions from Rabiu Kwankwaso and Femi Fani-Kayode, who publicly distanced themselves from the cleric’s comments, may be politically expedient. Their criticisms merely acknowledge the obvious, that openly framing presidential elections as a religious contest is divisive and capable of alienating millions of Nigerians.
Yet, their condemnations do not erase a more uncomfortable reality. Jingir merely voiced publicly what many Nigerians fear is quietly taking root within sections of the northern political establishment: the belief that the Muslim-Muslim ticket has become an acceptable political formula that can be sustained without consequences.
If that perception is allowed to harden, Nigeria will move dangerously close to institutionalising religious exclusion at the highest level of government.
Equally troubling is the recurring assertion that Muslims constitute such an overwhelming numerical majority that electoral outcomes are virtually predetermined. Such claims are frequently deployed to justify political calculations built around religious identity.
Nigeria’s demographic composition has always been contested, with no credible religious census conducted in decades. The country’s complex religious and ethnic diversity makes sweeping numerical claims difficult to verify. It is therefore unhealthy for political actors to weaponise unverified demographic assertions as though they were settled facts.
Many Nigerians also argue that the country’s political structure, including the biased creation of states and local government areas, has shaped political influence in ways that continue to generate debate about equity and representation. Others have raised longstanding concerns about electoral integrity in parts of the country where under-age street beggers and foreigners are invited from neighbouring countries to cast votes in Nigerian elections. Whether or not one agrees with these views, they underscore why triumphalist claims of inevitable religious or regional dominance should be treated with caution rather than accepted uncritically.
No democracy benefits when one section of the country assumes permanent political entitlement while expecting others to accept perpetual accommodation.
Silence has consequences. The relative calm with which many Christian leaders and communities responded to the Muslim-Muslim ticket in 2023 was widely interpreted as a sacrifice made in the interest of national stability. It was an attempt to prevent religious tensions from escalating.
But peace should never be mistaken for surrender. Tolerance should never be interpreted as weakness. Accommodation should never become an invitation to permanent exclusion.
If Nigerians who believe in inclusiveness remain silent whenever influential voices openly campaign for religiously exclusive political arrangements, today’s exception may become tomorrow’s convention. Once that happens, reversing it will become infinitely more difficult.
This debate is no longer about Bola Tinubu, Kashim Shettima, APC or the 2027 election. It is about preserving Nigeria’s secular character and ensuring that no religious group, however influential, creates the impression that the nation’s highest offices belong by right to adherents of a particular faith.
Christian leaders, churches and indeed all Nigerians who believe in equity should reject such rhetoric firmly, peacefully and constitutionally. They must insist that competence, fairness, national cohesion and inclusiveness, not religious identity, remain the guiding principles for leadership recruitment.
If they fail to speak now, they may soon discover that the Muslim-Muslim ticket has ceased to be an exception and has quietly become Nigeria’s political tradition.
And that would be a tragedy not only for Christians, but for the very idea of a united, secular and inclusive Nigeria.
