Shehu Buba Controversy: Debate Grows Over Use of Minbar for Political Defence
By Bilesanmi Abayomi
Public affairs analyst Omoba Awofeso Rasheed Ololade has criticised the use of religious platforms to defend political figures, following Friday sermons addressing allegations against Bauchi Senator Shehu Buba Umar.
The intersection of religion and partisan politics has come under renewed scrutiny in Nigeria following Friday sermons by Islamic clerics defending Senator Shehu Buba Umar amid allegations linking him to banditry and terrorism financing.
Buba, who represents Bauchi South Senatorial District and is the Peoples Redemption Party (PRP) candidate for governor of Bauchi State in the 2027 election, has consistently denied the allegations, describing them as politically motivated.
The controversy intensified after Imam Murtadha Gusau published a Friday sermon describing Buba as a Muslih, or mediator, rather than a sponsor of terrorism. In the sermon, Gusau argued that the senator’s interactions with armed groups should be understood within the context of peace-building and efforts to address insecurity.
Buba has meanwhile sought formal investigation of the allegations. On September 14, he said he had made himself available to the Department of State Services, the Defence Intelligence Agency and the Nigeria Police Force to investigate claims linking him to banditry, terrorism financing, kidnapping and other crimes.
Religious pulpit or political platform?
The involvement of religious figures in the controversy has prompted questions about the appropriate boundaries between spiritual guidance and partisan political advocacy.
Related Articles
Oyebanjo Urges Islamic Clerics to Keep Politics Out of Friday Sermons
Friday Sermon: Senator Shehu Buba Umar Is Now Innocent, Until Proven Guilty!
Ololade said using religious platforms to champion or defend individual politicians risks weakening public confidence in religious institutions.
“This may reduce public trust in religious institutions, create divisions among worshippers with different political views, and weaken the perceived neutrality and moral authority of religious leaders,” he said.
He argued that religious leaders should place justice, truth and accountability at the centre of their public interventions, regardless of the political affiliation of those involved.
The debate has also focused on the use of the Islamic concept of Muslih, traditionally associated with reconciliation and peace-making, to describe political actors involved in negotiations or engagement with armed groups.
Supporters of Buba’s position have portrayed his interactions with security actors and communities affected by violence as part of non-kinetic efforts to address insecurity. Buba has similarly said that some of his previous engagements with military, intelligence and other security agencies have been misinterpreted as evidence of links to criminal groups.
Critics, however, argue that religious platforms should not be used to settle contested political or security allegations. They contend that questions involving alleged criminal conduct should be resolved through evidence, investigation and due process rather than through religious advocacy.
Allegations remain disputed
The allegations against Buba have circulated through political statements, viral videos and public commentary. He has rejected them and challenged anyone with credible evidence to submit it to the appropriate security agencies or courts.
The Peoples Redemption Party has also rejected the allegations against its governorship candidate, describing them as an attempt to damage his reputation ahead of the 2027 election.
There is currently no basis to treat the allegations as established criminal findings. Buba’s decision to seek investigation means the claims remain subject to scrutiny by the relevant authorities.
The controversy nevertheless raises a broader question about the role of religious institutions in Nigeria’s increasingly contested political environment: how can religious leaders participate in public affairs and promote peace without their platforms being perceived as endorsing particular political interests?
As the 2027 elections approach, that distinction is likely to remain increasingly important for religious institutions whose influence extends beyond the pulpit.