The Human Rights Writers Association of Nigeria (HURIWA) has warned that unchecked religious rhetoric ahead of the 2027 elections could deepen Nigeria’s fault lines, demanding that President Bola Ahmed Tinubu and Vice President Kashim Shettima publicly clarify their position on a controversial statement attributed to Islamic cleric Sheikh Sani Jingir.
Jingir was reported to have argued that a Muslim-Muslim presidency is ideal because Muslims constitute the majority of Nigerians.
Rather than treating the controversy as a theological argument, HURIWA said the statement should be viewed through the lens of Nigeria’s increasingly sensitive political environment and the potential consequences for the 2027 elections.
In a statement by its National Coordinator, Emmanuel Nnadozie Onwubiko, the organisation said the silence of the President and Vice President was particularly troubling because both leaders occupy offices that are constitutionally expected to represent Nigerians across religious lines.
HURIWA warned that continued silence could create the impression that religious majoritarianism is acceptable at the highest levels of government.
The group said Nigeria could not afford to allow religious identity to become a criterion for determining who was considered entitled to political power.
“Democracy is not religious majoritarianism. Majority status does not confer superior citizenship,” HURIWA said.
The organisation maintained that Muslims and Christians enjoy equal citizenship and that no religious community has a constitutional claim to political supremacy.
It also renewed its opposition to a same-faith presidency, arguing that the concern was not directed against Islam or Christianity but was rooted in the need for political inclusion and confidence in a country where religious identity remains a major fault line.
‘Don’t wait for violence’
HURIWA warned that the danger was not merely rhetorical.
With political parties already positioning for the 2027 elections, the group said inflammatory religious narratives could be exploited by political actors, criminal gangs and extremists to mobilise supporters against perceived religious opponents.
It urged the Federal Government to treat potentially divisive statements as an early-warning issue rather than waiting until they translate into violence.
“The Federal Government must not wait for blood to be spilled before it recognises the danger of incendiary rhetoric,” the organisation said.
HURIWA also called on the Department of State Services, Nigeria Police Force and other relevant authorities to determine whether the reported statement breached any laws relating to incitement, hate speech or religious discrimination.
It questioned whether influential clerics and political figures were subject to the same legal standards as ordinary citizens.
“There must be no sacred cows in the enforcement of laws against hate speech, incitement and religious discrimination,” it said.
HURIWA puts Presidency on the spot
The rights group challenged Tinubu and Shettima to answer a direct question: whether they agree that a Muslim-Muslim presidency is “ideal” simply because Muslims constitute the majority.
It said a rejection of the proposition should be made publicly and without ambiguity.
According to HURIWA, silence from the Presidency risks turning a controversial religious assertion into an issue of political interpretation.
“The President and Vice President were elected and appointed to serve all Nigerians, not a religious constituency,” the group said.
The organisation consequently demanded that both leaders distance themselves from religious supremacy narratives and reaffirm the constitutional principle of equal citizenship.
For HURIWA, the controversy is ultimately less about one cleric’s statement than about whether Nigeria’s political leadership will confront religious polarisation before it becomes an electoral weapon in 2027.