Nigerian presidency on Saturday slammed representatives of the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of Nigeria over their conduct during a recent meeting with President Bola Tinubu, insisting that the clerics were not the sole custodians of truth on the state of the nation.
The presidency also faulted the Archbishop Emeritus of the Catholic Archdiocese of Abuja, Cardinal John Onaiyekan, for publicly disclosing details of the closed-door meeting, describing his comments as inappropriate and a breach of the confidentiality expected of such high-level engagements.
in separate statements on Saturday, Presidential aides Temitope Ajayi and Daniel Bwala, in separate statements on Saturday, defended Tinubu’s response to the bishops’ criticism of his administration, arguing that the clerics’ assessment of the country’s economy, security and governance reflected only one perspective and was open to scrutiny and rebuttal.
Their reactions followed comments made by Onaiyekan during an interview on Prime Time, an Arise Television programme aired on Friday, in which he revealed details of the meeting between Tinubu and a delegation of the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of Nigeria at the Presidential Villa on July 28.
Onaiyekan said: “Let me say first and foremost that that statement read by our president was not just put together at random. It was carefully considered and with wide consultation. The Bishops’ Conference is bigger than the group of us that were there, but it is very representative of the Bishops’ Conference.
“So, it is the Catholic Bishops’ Conference that produced that document. It was written, rewritten and corrected. So it was not done at random, nor did we deliver it with levity.
“I think I have an opportunity in this programme to remind Nigerians that, as bishops, we have no ambitions to take Mr. Tinubu’s job or anybody else’s job. We are not politicians running for office.
“We are, first and foremost, religious leaders who feel we have a duty—not just to preach our religious doctrines, but also to address the lives of our people, both those who are our members and those who are not. You can see that from the content and the tone of our statement.
“When the nation is bleeding, you cannot expect a polite meeting with the head of state. We told him the economy is not helping our poor people; he told us the economy is doing fine. Frankly speaking, he told us quite clearly that he did not agree with us.
“We didn’t expect him to agree with us. We have done our duty, we have delivered our message, and we have a feeling that, somehow, along the line, somebody will show him a few of the things we said.
“We are not politicians running for office. We are religious leaders who feel we have a duty not just to preach our doctrines but also to address the lives of our people.
“You asked me what I saw on the face of the President in reaction. I was not surprised that he was not looking very happy, nor were his colleagues who were there.
“We knew that this was different from the kind of statements that our President keeps receiving from all kinds of people. That is one of the things that worries us: there are so many people hanging around Mr President, giving him a rosy picture of what the country is, which it is not.
“We felt that we had a duty not to do that. Indeed, we have the obligation to help him appreciate the reality of the situation in which we find ourselves. That is the reality that we painted, which I know is not the kind of thing that he wanted to hear. And his reply showed that very clearly.”
Hitting back to the interview, Tinubu’s Senior Special Assistant to the President on Media and Publicity, Temitope Ajayi, criticised the bishops for focusing on the country’s challenges while paying little attention to what he described as the achievements of the Tinubu administration.
Ajayi said: “Except for their grudging acknowledgement of the benefits of NELFUND, they were dismissive of the other great things done by the administration. The bishops were notably acerbic in their submission, but the President listened to them patiently and responded.
“That should ordinarily have been where the matter rested. None of the issues raised by the bishops is beyond scrutiny or rebuttal. Their assessment is neither scripture nor an article of faith. It is a perspective, and perspectives can be challenged with facts and evidence.
“They know, from lived experience rather than official pronouncements, that there has been real relief in the regular payment of salaries and pensions. While this does not erase the discomfort many Nigerians still face, it is wrong to dismiss or ignore those improvements casually.
“So, when President Tinubu reminded the bishops of these facts during the meeting, he was not, as Cardinal Onaiyekan later suggested, being aloof or dismissive. He was presenting evidence to support his argument that the country is not standing still. A disagreement over facts should not be interpreted as arrogance.”
And, on his part, Special Adviser to the President on Policy Communication, Daniel Bwala, accused Onaiyekan of allowing politics to influence his comments.
He alleged that the Catholic Church had openly supported the Labour Party presidential candidate, Peter Obi, during the 2023 general election, arguing that the cardinal’s intervention should therefore be viewed within that context.
Bwala said: “Cardinal Onaiyekan wasn’t speaking for Christians; he was speaking for Catholics, the very institution rooting for Peter Obi.
“Therefore, the Cardinal is more political than spiritual. And not all Catholic members are supporting Peter Obi. The President was well within his right to disagree with their assertion regarding Nigeria’s economy based purely on facts, statistics and numbers put into context.”