By Dennis Okechukwu
The Christian Social Movement of Nigeria (CSMN) has warned against politicising the leadership of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), saying threats by the Supreme Council for Shari’ah in Nigeria (SCSN) to boycott elections along religious lines could increase tensions and weaken public trust in Nigeria’s democracy.
Reacting to the call for the sacking of the chairman of INEC, Prof Joash Amupitan, the organisation said his appointment remains the constitutional prerogative of the President in conjunction with the National Assembly.
The CSMN in a statement by the Chairman of its Governing Council, Elder Sunday Oibe, and Chief Executive Officer, Bosun Emmanuel, called for caution in public comments that could worsen the country’s already fragile political and security situation.
The CSMN told religious groups to avoid actions that could deepen divisions and weaken national unity, adding that appointments to national institutions should be guided by constitutional procedures, not religious pressure.
While urging the council to join the collective national push for constitutional reform, the group said religious bodies must avoid actions and pronouncements capable of deepening tensions in an already fragile country, adding that they should guard
against what it described as inflammatory comments.
The CSMN was reacting to comments credited to the SCSN President, Sheikh Bashir Umar, made during the council’s 2026 Annual Pre-Ramadan Lecture and General Assembly in Abuja, where he reportedly called for Amupitan’s resignation, describing him as a threat to Nigeria’s democratic credibility.
The Shari’ah group was also said to have warned that Muslims would neither recognise nor legitimise elections conducted under his leadership.
But the CSMN argued that such threats were unnecessary and risked inflaming sectarian sentiments.
The organisation said that the appointment of the INEC chairman remains the constitutional prerogative of the President in conjunction with the National Assembly.
Drawing historical parallels, the CSMN noted that former President Goodluck Jonathan, a Christian, appointed Prof. Attahiru Jega, a Muslim, as INEC chairman without any religious backlash, just as former President Muhammadu Buhari, a Muslim, appointed Prof. Mahmood Yakubu, also a Muslim, without similar threats of election boycott.
The group questioned why the appointment of Amupitan under President Bola Tinubu had suddenly provoked religious objections, suggesting that the resistance was rooted more in identity than in merit.
According to the group, the controversy surrounding Amupitan stemmed from a legal opinion he expressed in his capacity as a legal practitioner regarding reports of killings of Christians in parts of Nigeria, insisting that such an opinion should not be weaponised to question his neutrality as INEC chairman.
The CSMN argued that Christians and other non-Muslims had not called for the removal of public officials with known religious affiliations or past religious advocacy.
It said, “The matter for which Prof. Amupitan is being labelled a threat to democracy is rather trivial. That citizen gave a legal opinion in his capacity as a legal practitioner, on a report that documented genocide against Christians in Nigeria.
“That opinion was no different from the campaign of the All Progressives Congress (APC), which went to the United States in 2014, interestingly during the presidency of Dr Goodluck Jonathan, to raise global alarm about Christians being “slaughtered” in Nigeria, which the same APC government is now denying for political expediency. Maybe the APC should also resign entirely from governance for being guiltier of the very act that a citizen is being sternly vilified.
“It is clear that the Shari’ah Council’s objection to Prof. Amupitan’s appointment has nothing to do with his legal opinion but everything to do with his not being a northern Muslim, especially his being a Christian. It is to be assumed that the Shari’ah Council is fully aware that Section 38(1) of the tolerated 1999 Constitution guarantees freedom of religious conviction to every citizen.
The group cited examples of heads of federal institutions who had publicly expressed strong religious positions while in office without triggering calls for their dismissal.
CSMN called for a broader national conversation on Nigeria’s constitutional framework, particularly the status of Shari’ah within the legal system.
It distinguished between Shari’ah personal law, which it said aligns with customary law and is constitutionally recognised, and Shari’ah criminal law, which it argued lacks clear constitutional backing and has contributed to tensions in parts of the country.
Quoting several legal authorities, including Prof. Ben Nwabueze, Justice Mohammed Bello and Mr. Solomon Asemota (SAN), the CSMN maintained that aspects of Shari’ah criminal law are inconsistent with provisions of the 1999 Constitution, especially regarding freedom of religion.
The group contended that rather than focus on the removal of an electoral official, religious leaders and citizens should unite in demanding either a new constitution or a return to the 1963 Republican Constitution, which it said would better reflect national consensus and promote fairness across religious and ethnic lines.
“Attempts to deepen religious imbalance when the country should be seeking healing and fairness will only drag it deeper into mutual suspicion and sectarian violence,” the statement said.
The CSMN urged the Shari’ah Council to channel its influence toward advocating constitutional reform in the interest of justice and national cohesion, rather than pursuing what it described as a divisive campaign against the INEC chairman.