Atiku’s Defence of Onaiyekan Revives Questions Over Deborah Samuel Response

Atiku Abubakar’s defence of Cardinal John Onaiyekan has been framed as a defence of free speech. However, disagreement with a cleric is not the same as censorship. President Tinubu invited Catholic bishops, heard their concerns and publicly disagreed with their assessment. Cardinal Onaiyekan has the right to criticise the government, and the President has the right to respond. Religious office should not place anyone beyond public scrutiny, nor should the wider Catholic Church be treated as responsible for every political position expressed by one cleric. The criticism of Atiku centres on his response to the killing of Deborah Samuel over an alleged blasphemy accusation. He initially condemned the murder but later deleted the post after backlash. Critics argue that his current defence of outspoken religious voices therefore appears selective, especially when political consequences are low. Democracy protects criticism and rebuttal alike. The issue is whether political leaders apply that principle consistently, regardless of electoral risk.

Use The App To Win ₦1m

Stories are shared by community members. This article does not represent the official view of NaijaWorld — the author is solely responsible for its content.