9th December, 2024
PRESS RELEASE:
MURIC KWARA BRANCH REPLIES
ANTHONY KILA
Professor Anthony Kila recently penned an article under
the title ‘A Threat Called MURIC’ in which he attacked the Muslim Rights
Concern (MURIC), an Islamic human rights organization. But the chairman of the
Kwara State Chapter of MURIC, Barrister Taofeeq Jaji, has debunked all the
allegations levelled by Professor Kila against MURIC and its leadership.
In a statement released to
the media on Monday, 9th December, 2024 which was captioned, ‘A
Rejoinder to Dr. Anthony Kila’s Article Titled “A Threat Called MURIC’,
Barrister Taofeeq Jaji said:
“Dr Anthony Kila’s recent piece titled 'A Threat Called MURIC'
raises important points about our shared responsibility for preserving harmony
and inclusivity in Yorubaland Politics. However, the article’s characterization
of MURIC (Muslim Rights Concern) and its director, Professor Ishaq Akintola, as
theeats reflects a misunderstanding of MURIC's intentions and activities. While
it is commendable to seek the preservation of unity and democracy, Dr. Kila’s
critique veers into misrepresentation, selective analysis, and unfounded
speculation, which deserve to be addressed.
“Just as Dr. Kila asks, “How did we get here?”, one might similarly
inquire how a group advocating for fairness and inclusion becomes the target of
accusations of divisiveness. Let us examine the issues raised.
“Dr. Kila paints MURIC as a small but vocal group
sowing unnecessary and 'toxic divisiveness.' This is both a simplistic and
inaccurate depiction. MURIC, under the leadership of Professor Akintola, has
branches across the 36 States of the federation, consistently advocating for
the rights of Nigerian Muslims, a legitimate effort aligned with constitutional
guarantees of freedom of religion and freedom of expression. To deliberately
construe this advocacy as divisive ignores the context in which it arises: a landscape
where Muslims are underrepresented and misrepresented in public spaces, media,
and policy.
“Besides, size is no determinant of impact or legitimacy. By this
logic, any minority group championing its rights would be dismissed as
'unnecessary.' Rather than dismissing MURIC’s voice, it is important to engage
with the substance of its concerns.
“The article accuses MURIC of intolerance for criticizing GOTV's
disproportionate airing of Christian programs. It describes the criticism as a
'sort of fatwa' and frames it as an attack on Christianity. This is gross
misrepresentation. MURIC’s demand for balanced representation is not about
suppressing Christian content but about ensuring that Muslims, too, have
equitable access to media platforms.
A diverse society like Nigeria thrives on inclusivity. When any
group raises concerns about being underrepresented, the solution is not to
label them intolerant but to engage with their grievances constructively. The
call for dialogue with GOTV is not a threat but an invitation to address
legitimate concerns about inclusivity.
“By the way, it is obvious that Kila attempted to
mislead the general public about MURIC's complaint. Contrary to Kila's writeup,
MURIC did not ask GOTV to stop airing Christian programmes. It merely protested
against putting the Christian 'Faith' programme as a default channel to be
viewed by customers as they switch on their television sets. It is needless to
point out that even the 'Faith' programme has its own channel allotted to it (Channel
110) while Islam channel is in channel 111.
“Dr. Kila rightly celebrates Yorubaland’s history of interfaith
harmony, but he erroneously suggests that MURIC threatens this legacy. Far from
undermining harmony, MURIC’s work seeks to ensure that Muslims in Yorubaland
and beyond enjoy their rights within that same harmonious framework.
Highlighting imbalances in representation or participation does not equate to
fostering division; it is a call for equity. Kila is attempting to silence
Muslims.
“The article also suggests that Yoruba culture inherently separates
religion from politics, implying that MURIC’s advocacy disrupts this
arrangement. However, it overlooks the reality that politics and religion often
intersect in public policy. It is within this intersection that MURIC operates,
calling for fairness in public affairs, including representation and
appointments. To conflate this advocacy with sectarianism is both unfair and
misleading.
“Dr. Kila accuses MURIC of rejecting Governor
Babajide Sanwo-Olu’s re-election bid solely based on his religion. This
characterization is simplistic. MURIC’s stance on the rotation of political
offices reflects broader discussions about inclusivity and equitable
representation, not religious bigotry. While one might disagree with MURIC’s
reasoning, dismissing it as religious discrimination misrepresents the group’s
argument.
“Furthermore, Yoruba cosmopolitanism, as rightly noted by Dr. Kila,
thrives on dialogue and merit. MURIC’s critiques should be seen as part of that
dialogue rather than an attempt to undermine it.
“Dr. Kila speculates that MURIC might be acting as an agent for
undisclosed ‘political principles’. This insinuation is baseless and detracts
from meaningful discourse. By its admission, MURIC is a non-political
organization focused on advocacy for Muslim rights. If there is evidence to the
contrary, it should be presented. Speculative accusations without proof serve
only to distract from substantive issues.
“Kila concludes by urging readers to guard against threats to
harmony and democracy, naming MURIC as a present danger. Ironically, the very
freedom that allows Dr. Kila to critique MURIC is the same freedom that MURIC
advocates for Muslims to enjoy. Harmony does not mean silence in the face of
perceived inequities; it means addressing them constructively while respecting
all parties.
“To preserve Yorubaland’s enviable legacy of interfaith unity, we
must engage with all voices, even those we disagree with, rather than
dismissing them as threats. If Dr. Kila truly believes in protecting democracy
and harmony, he must extend this principle to include MURIC’s right to advocate
for fairness. Now it is Kila who does not want the voice of dissent. Kila has a
phobia for Muslim freedom. In this context, Kila is the threat, not MURIC, not
Akintola.
“MURIC is not a threat to Yorubaland’s harmony or Nigeria’s
democracy. It is an advocacy group seeking to amplify Muslim voices in a
society where they often feel marginalized. Dismissing their efforts as
divisive ignores the substance of their grievances. Rather than silencing or
misrepresenting such groups, let us engage in dialogue, address legitimate
concerns, and work together to strengthen the harmony and inclusivity which we
all cherish.
#MURICNotAThreat
#KilaIsTheThreat
Bar. Taofeek Jaji,
Chairman,
Muslim Rights Concern (MURIC),
Kwara State Chapter
