MUSLIM RIGHTS
CONCERN (MURIC)
هيئة حقوق المسلمين
Motto: Dialogue,
Not Violence
31st January, 2026
PRESS RELEASE:
AMUPITAN: CAN CANNOT
ADDRESS THE ISSUE – MURIC
An Islamic human
rights group, the Muslim Rights Concern (MURIC), has lashed out at the northern
wing of the Christian Association of Nigeria (CAN) for defending the chairman
of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), Professor Joash Amupitan,
over the allegation of instigating the branding of Nigeria as a country of
particular interest and orchestrating the fictitious and malicious Christian
genocide narrative.
In a statement
circulated to newsmen on Saturday, 31st January, 2026 by the Executive Director
of the group, Professor Ishaq Akintola, MURIC slammed Northern CAN for ignoring
the substance while pursuing the shadow.
The group
continued:
"Two days ago,
precisely on Thursday, 29th January, 2026, the Christian Association of Nigeria
(CAN), Northern wing, defended the chairman of the Independent National
Electoral Commission (INEC) over the allegation of instigating the branding of
Nigeria as a country of particular interest and orchestrating a fictitious and
malicious Christian genocide narrative.
"In a press
release signed on the issue, the Chairman of Northern CAN, Reverend Joseph John
Hayab and the Secretary General, Bishop Mohammed Naga, accused the Supreme
Council for Shari'ah in Nigeria (SCSN) of politicising religion. This was in
response to the Council's demand for Amupitan's sack. (https://guardian.ng/news/can-condemns-shariah-councils-call-to-remove-amupitan/).
"What we know
of mature groups is that they confront issues directly and address them as
presented while objective people review situations and separate emotions from
facts. But in this case, CAN has elected to put its weight behind sentiment
rather than reality. It has ignored the substance while pursuing mere shadow.
CAN cannot address the issue.
"We therefore
put it to CAN that its approach is escapist, cowardly and emotion-laden. It
will not sell. How can CAN leave the offender to query the whistle blower? What
kind of examination malpractice panel will ignore the candidate who cheats to
sanction the invigilator who merely did his job as required?
"Who does
that? How can CAN do this to Nigeria? How can CAN brush aside the issue of
reporting Nigeria to America while focusing on those who interrogated the
report as well as the reporter? How can CAN leave the tangential for the
peripheral? How can CAN?
"Instead of
denying or confirming that Amupitan wrote the false and incriminating legal
brief, CAN ignored the subject matter and turned round to accusedaccuse
the Shari'ah Council of politicising religion. But is that the
issue?
“The question is whether Amupitan wrote the legal brief
or not. CAN sidestepped the issue, dribbling, gangling, grandstanding and
maradonising. CAN cannot address the issue.
“Amupitan is only lucky
that his Satanic brief was not uncovered until he was given the INEC
appointment otherwise he would never have scaled through. But he does not have
to be a Kenyan before knowing that it is not yet Uhuru.
"It is now crystal
clear that Northern CAN seeks to sweep Amupitan's treasonable offence under the
carpet. Yet Northern CAN knows that it is defending the indefensible. That is
why it cannot mention the offence committed by Professor Amupitan. A man
committed the grave offence of treason against his country, yet CAN is
encouraging him. CAN is defending him.
"Let us look
around the world and see the fate of those who betrayed their countries? They
were charged with treason, sedition or espionage and sentenced to long-term
imprisonment or executed.
"Edmund
Campion, one of the Forty Martyrs of England and Wales, was executed in 1577
for high treason. Guy Fawkes, the English Catholic, was hanged for treason in
1606. The Norwegian Vidkun Quisling, though a former minister of defense in
Norway, he later became a spy for the Nazis. He was executed after Germany
surrendered in 1945, etc, etc.
“Yet we are not asking
for the prosecution of Amupitan. No, we are not so vindictive. But only a fool
is bitten in the same snake hole twice. We are simply expressing our fear. Nigerian
Muslims do not trust this INEC boss, Professor Joash Amupitan. Give us another
Christian (from the same North Central if you like). But for us, Amupitan is
bad market. We will not touch him with a long pole. Or have we asked for too
much?
“A man who writes such
frivolous fiction against peace-loving and law-abiding Muslims should not be
allowed to decide the fate of the same Muslims. It will amount to gross
injustice, executive impunity and deliberate provocation if the Federal
Government (FG) ignores the complaints of Muslims against Amupitan on this
matter. Already, more than four mainstream Islamic organizations have demanded
the removal of the INEC boss. The umbrella organization of Nigerian Muslims was
the first to condemn his unpatriotic action.
"What else does
CAN want to know about those opposing Amupitan's headship of INEC? The Nigerian
Supreme Council for Islamic Affairs (NSCIA) condemned his legal
brief. The Shari'ah Council complained openly. MURIC demanded his removal
three times within the last two months. The Muslim Media Watch Group (MMWG) called
for his sack yesterday. What else does CAN want to know?
“All Muslim groups are
saying the same thing, namely, Amupitan must go. He has become an
existential threat to Islamdom as far as democratic enfranchisement is
concerned. Our frank advice to FG is to
let Amupitan go. We
warn that no good surgeon will hesitate to amputate a rotten
part of the anatomy knowing that failure to do so may cause the infection to
spread to all parts of the body.
“The Northern
Christian body also questioned the motive behind the demand for the removal of
Amupitan and wanted to know those sponsoring the call and why such interests
are hiding behind the platform of a religious body. We wonder who told CAN that
we are in hiding.
"We are not
hiding. Our identities are well known and we are speaking out loud and clear.
We are exercising our fundamental human rights of freedom of expression. The
champions of free speech in the United States and the European Union know it
even if it is not in their cardinal principle that Muslims should enjoy such
rights.
"There is
concrete evidence of the 80-page legal brief penned by Amupitan and it is replete
with lies, hate speech and disdain for Northern Muslims. Amupitan himself has
not denied it. Even CAN avoided the main issue, neither denying nor confirming
Amupitan's spiteful, mean, petty and parochial petition.
“We are not
surprised anyway. We are not surprised that Northern CAN is supporting
Amupitan. Didn’t CAN itself betray President Bola Ahmed Tinubu by the same
attitude and with the same clandestine reports to the United States about
Christian genocide in Nigeria?
“Was CAN unaware of
the likely backlash on the Nigerian leader and the generality of the Nigerian
people, if not a la Panama, then a la Venezuela? But did the
thought hold them back? A president who risked everything, a man who bent over
backwards to give them almost all the gold and diamond in the land of the
rising sun was betrayed by them. So what are we saying?
“We are worried that
Northern CAN leadership has failed to learn from the pages of the Bible: Judas
betrayed Jesus (peace be upon him Mathew 26:47-56). Joseph was betrayed by his
brothers (Genesis 37:23-28). Samson was betrayed by Delilah (Judges 16:4-21) while
David was given away by his own son Absalom (2 Samuel 15-18). Yet our
neighbours will not ponder over the fate of those biblical traitors.
“Already, many Nigerians
are asking: Et tu CAN? But MURIC is not surprised. Birds of the same feather
flock together. Treachery is in some people’s Deoxyribonucleic Acid (DNA.).
Like Quisling, like Guy Fawkes. Like Amupitan, like Northen CAN. CAN is beating
around the bush. CAN cannot address the issue. No, CAN cannot.”
#CANAddressTheIssue
#CANCannot
Professor Ishaq
Akintola,
Founder/Executive
Director,
Muslim Rights
Concern (MURIC).
