Nigeria is a country comprising people who believe in different kinds of religion. The three main groups are identified as, Christians, Muslims and believers in African traditional faith. The case has consistently been made that Nigerians are a religious people and that to whatever creed they belong, they all desire to live in peace and worship in peace. It is for this reason that Nigerians have continually urged the Federal government to find a lasting solution to the Boko Haram insurgence in the North Eastern Nigeria
The state is vested with the power to promote the welfare of the people; it is the duty of the state to endeavour to create a peaceful and conducive atmosphere for all its citizens to practice freely whatever religion they choose to follow.
In drawing up a written constitution for the country, Nigeria has shown a wise preference for the separation of state and religion. The wisdom of the choice can be demonstrated not only from the nature of organized religion, but also from our experience as a nation. Organised religions in Nigeria, as elsewhere have tended to create competing social orders, directing how social life and the society in general should be organized.
A brief history of how the state came to be involved in pilgrimages is, perhaps, in order. Long before the British took over what is now known as Nigeria, Muslims used to travel to, Saudi Arabia on pilgrimage. Two routes were known to exist at that time. The first one stretched from Kano to Tripoli, then to Alexandria and from there to Jedda by boat. The second route, which developed later, ran through chad and the Sudan from where the pilgrims crossed over to Jedda by boat. In those days, the journey took years and the roads were fraught with many perils. When the British arrived, they regulated the Sudan route in coordination with their officers in the Sudan and the Consul in Jeddah in order to save the people from the exploitation and callousness of the pilgrim’s agents. Passports were issued and official convoys organized. In the 1950’s the western Nigeria government set up a pi1grims Welfare” Agency to monitor the activities of pilgrims’ Agents. The Northern Nigeria government followed suit and posted an agent to work after the large number of pilgrims from the north, while in Saudi Arabia. The exploitation of the pilgrims, many of who were innocent farmers from the rural areas, by the agents, who were private entrepreneurs. This led the government of General Yakubu Gowon (Rtd) in 1975 to promulgate a decree establishing the Nigerian pilgrims Board (NBP). The Board was charged with the responsibility of the welfare of the pilgrims. It was under the Federal Ministry of External Affairs, similar boards, which are called welfare agencies, were established by the various state governments. The NPB was originally charged with the welfare of Muslim pilgrims but during the second Republic, it was also given the responsibility of catering for Christian pilgrims.
Potentially, the most negative tendency of organized religions in Nigeria is their claim to be the most basic community. They atimes submerge and transcend the ethnic community, and periodically challenge the national community known as Nigeria. Consequent upon this, if we accept the thesis that the religious disturbances we have been experiencing since 1980 are to some extent more than religious, it is clear that their perpetrators are not just fighting another religious group but the society, the national community of Nigeria. That is what we are witnessing today.
Suffice to state, that a developing country needs organized religions, but it also needs self- sustained development and liberation from all forms of imperialism. Except where organized religion in Nigeria, has allied itself with functional education, its theory has failed to remedy the dependence of the poor on the rich. But authentic national independent and development are goals which a secular state would not wish to negotiate a nation wishes to develop and be truly independent, it has to make provision for the state and organized religions to go their separate ways in essential issues, especially those relating to national sovereignty and interest.
The two organized religions have the tendency to delay national integration, this delay occur when religion is mixed with politic. The result would be to emphasize the dichotomy between the geo-political zones. But if organized religions and the state are kept reasonably separate, it becomes easier for the nation to find other lasting bases of regional, economic and political integration. When we mix the two organized religions with the state, we jeopardize whole some political and economic behavior. It would seem best to keep the two religions separate and let every adherent practice what they preach, all within the framework of laws of the land.
It is noteworthy to stress, that there are three areas where the state and organized religion will tend to clash even if both are kept separate. The first is the concept of a religious community with the attendant claim of the community to absolute loyalty and to territoriality. Obviously, a nation state cannot allow any organized religion to lay absolute claim to a ten and the loyalty of a citizen, to the excursion of that state.
The second is the demand or impact of organized religions on the economy. An organized religion whose practices undermine that nation’s economy by interfering with the pro processes and manpower development, wasting investment resources will soon or later, clash with the nation- state. It is possible for pilgrimages, burial ceremonies, the working week and social habits to follow the dictates of religion to the point where they become counter- productive. The third potential area of conflict is external re1ations. The major world religions are by nature not confined to one country. They, therefore, generate external relations of their own. But religious affiliations with external bodies can go too far. It is obvious that they have gone too far when loyalty of a citizen to those external organizations supersedes his loyalty to his own country.
The basic point is that keeping the state and religion separate should permit religion to be confined largely to the realm of private life and individual conscience. It should permit state affairs to be conducted on the basis of rationality, Justice and fairness. It should reinforce integrative processes in the country such as the emergence of social formations for business and social welfare, inter and intra- groupings vis-á-vis inter- ethnic marriages.
We should accept that a certain degree of intermingling between state and religion is unavoidable; therefore, we must nevertheless state that such intermingling is not a cure for social ills in Nigeria. Experience has shown that there is hardly any positive correlation between religious piety and strong morality. The emphasis has been on extravagant display of religious symbolism, which tends to divide communities rather than unite them, other- worldliness, and rituals with hardly any wholesome impact on the social and economic behavior of the adherents. The excessive religiosity we have had in the country has not had visible effect on our economic, social and political relations. Religious observances do not appear to have prevented or significantly reduced corruption. They do not appear to have had a moderating effect on class privileges bordering on exploitation. They are yet, to positively affect the economy in terms of promoting hard work, self- reliance, honesty and thrift. Their effect on the governance of the country and formal education which is the main vehicle of change has been mixed at best.
Finally, the policies of government should not only support religious liberty, it should be seen by all to be in favour of religious liberty. Government intervention in religious matters should be warranted only when the practice of a religion becomes an obvious threat to good governance and security of the state, Government should no longer make donations to religious bodies for the purpose of helping them establish places of worship while the protection of the interests of Nigerians on pilgrimage of course, should continue to be the responsibility of Nigerian embassies in the Holy places.
• VICTOR O. ILUMAH, A PUBLIC AFFAIRS ANALYST IS OF THE RUBBER RESEARCH INSTITUTE OF NIGERIA (RRIN), IYANOMO, NEAR BENIN CITY.
