Selective Anger in Northern Nigeria: Why Politics Matters More Than Dead Citizens
Nigeria is facing one of the most severe security crises in its modern history. As brutal attacks on civilians escalate across communities in the North and Middle Belt, the nation’s leadership and influential socio-religious bodies appear increasingly selective in where they choose to raise their voices. Nowhere is this more evident than in the glaring contrast between the urgent push to remove Professor Joash Amupitan as INEC Chairman and the deafening silence over mass killings, massacres, and humanitarian tragedy unfolding across vulnerable regions.
This imbalance is not just disappointing — it is dangerous hypocrisy that undermines the very fabric of national unity, exposes skewed priorities, and demeans the sanctity of human life.
When Human Lives Are Dying — Why the Silence?
In early February 2026, Nigeria experienced one of its worst massacres in recent memory, when armed extremists struck the villages of Woro and Nuku in Kwara State. Reports published by multiple international news agencies confirm that at least 162 people were killed, and estimates suggest the death toll could exceed 200 as bodies continue to be discovered. Victims included women, children, religious leaders and community members — all targeted after refusing to abandon the Nigerian state in favor of imposing an extremist form of sharia law.
This massacre is widely characterized as the deadliest single attack in the country so far in 2026, marking a dangerous escalation of extremist violence spreading beyond the traditional strongholds of insecurity.
Despite this, where is the national outrage, the immediate emergency response, and the unifying condemnation?
There are no mass publicized emergency meetings, no daily headlines of empathy, and no sustained pressure from influential groups demanding accountability or protection for these communities.
Here’s a snapshot of other atrocities that demanded — and still demand — urgent national attention:
In Katsina State, despite reports of peace deals with armed bandits, attacks continued unabated. Entire communities were raided, houses burned, women and children abducted, and villagers were forced to flee into forests and graveyards for shelter.
In Plateau State and other parts of the Middle Belt and North-Central Nigeria, local vigilante forces and civilians have been ambushed by bandits, resulting in dozens of deaths.
Across the wider Northern region, data and rights organizations have documented thousands of civilian deaths and a humanitarian crisis caused by jihadist, bandit, and militia attacks over several years. More than 10,000 fatalities have been recorded within just a two-year period, illustrating a profound failure to protect lives and communities.
And yet, where is the collective condemnation from leadership bodies, especially those with influence and moral authority?
The Sudden Obsession with Prof. Joash Amupitan
Against this backdrop of mass slaughter and societal fear, a powerful group — the Supreme Council of Sharia in Nigeria (SCSN) — has rapidly organized to demand the removal of Professor Joash Amupitan, the Chairman of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC). According to news reports, this call was made during the council’s annual lecture where its president openly rejected the legitimacy of future elections under Prof. Amupitan’s leadership.
The basis for these demands is centered on a legal brief attributed to Prof. Amupitan that referenced the contentious issue of alleged “Christian genocide” in Nigeria — a claim the Federal Government has dismissed.
This issue has drawn sharp reactions from other bodies as well. For instance, the Christian Association of Nigeria (CAN) in the Northern states publicly rebuffed the Sharia Council’s call as a “dangerous attempt to politicize religion” and undermine democratic institutions.
Even youth organizations such as the Arewa Youth Alliance for Religious Harmony have labelled the call for Amupitan’s removal as “ill-advised” and an unnecessary distraction from Nigeria’s deeper socio-economic and security challenges.
Despite this pushback, the narrative persists — and for reasons worth examining.
The Hypocrisy of Priorities
Let’s state the truth plainly:
🛑 When human beings are butchered in mass graves, there are no evening emergency press conferences.
🛑 When entire villages are burned and children are killed, there are no high-profile condemnations.
🛑 When peace deals in Katsina fall apart and people are slaughtered anyway, the silence from organized voices is deafening.
Yet — suddenly — the reaction to a political controversy grows into urgent meetings, fierce rhetoric, and widespread calls for removal of a public official.
This is not leadership. This is selective outrage.
This is morality measured by interests. This is concern weighted by political convenience.
This is a betrayal of the millions of Nigerians who look to leadership — religious, political, and social — for protection, guidance, and empathy.
Why This Matters for Nigeria’s Future
Nigeria is bleeding. Its people are dying. Its communities are displaced. Its credibility as a democratic state is under threat. And yet, many of those who claim moral or spiritual authority focus on issues that advance their group’s agenda — not the universal plight of the Nigerian citizen.
This selective anger is dangerous because:
1. It undermines national unity
When influential bodies choose political battles over humanitarian crises, it deepens divisions and signals that some lives matter more than others.
2. It emboldens violent actors
Silence in the face of slaughter sends a message to extremist groups: your violence will not be universally condemned.
3. It erodes moral credibility
Leaders who cry louder over politics than they do for massacred citizens lose all moral authority to speak on matters of conscience.
A Clear Message to Arewa and Other Leaders
To those in positions of influence across Nigeria — especially leaders in the North and Middle Belt regions:
📌 Your silence over mass murder is morally unacceptable.
📌 Your fixation on the politics of one man’s office ignores the daily bloodshed of communities.
📌 Human lives, national security, and collective safety should always outweigh power games.
Prof. Joash Amupitan and Democratic Integrity
For clarity: voices from across Nigeria — including religious and youth organizations — have affirmed that Prof. Amupitan will not be removed through intimidation or pressure from any group. The chairmanship of INEC is, constitutionally and legally, insulated from arbitrary sackings unless due process is followed.
Furthermore, the debate around electoral leadership should be about free, fair, and credible elections, not weaponizing religion or regional interests to derail democratic processes.
Conclusion: Where Will History Place Us?
Nigeria is at a crossroads.
History will remember who spoke out when children were slaughtered.
History will remember who chose silence when villages burned.
History will remember who elevated politics over humanity.
If this nation is to heal, protect its citizens, and build a true democratic identity, its leaders — religious, political, and social — must choose consistency in moral outrage, empathy in crisis, and courage in confronting insecurity.
Let us be a nation that cries for every life lost, not just the ones we choose to care about.
0 Comments