Former Special Assistant on Digital Communications to ex-President Muhammadu Buhari, Bashir Ahmad, has criticized the Christian Association of Nigeria (CAN) for taking legal action against the closure of schools in Kebbi, Katsina, and Bauchi States for the Ramadan fast.
In a post on X (formerly Twitter) on Monday, Ahmad argued that CAN’s involvement could set a controversial precedent, suggesting that a student body or a non-religious organization would have been a more appropriate party to challenge the policy in court.
Concerns Over Religious Precedent
Ahmad warned that if CAN succeeds in its legal battle, it might encourage Islamic organizations to challenge school closures for Christian holidays, such as Christmas.
“No matter how much I wanted to stay away from this topic, it is difficult to ignore the way it has been framed.
With all the student bodies and civil society organizations in this country, why does it have to be the Christian Association of Nigeria (CAN) that is threatening these state governments with legal action?”
He further lamented the tendency for policy decisions in Nigeria to quickly turn into religious disputes, urging CAN to take a more neutral stance.
“One of the biggest challenges we face as a nation is how quickly policy matters turn into religious battles. Instead of taking a sectarian approach, CAN should have allowed neutral stakeholders, such as student unions, education boards, and civil rights organizations, to engage these state governments constructively rather than turning it into a religious debate.”
Implications for Future Legal Battles
Ahmad posed a hypothetical scenario where the Muslim Rights Concern (MURIC) or other Islamic groups might legally challenge school closures for Christmas, leading to further religious tensions.
“Let’s assume CAN wins this legal battle. How would it be viewed if MURIC or any other Islamic organization decided to take legal action against states that close schools in December for the Christmas break?”
His remarks have sparked debates on whether CAN’s legal challenge is a necessary defense of religious rights or an escalation of religious tensions in governance.
