Launch of A Journey in Service – No Confessions to the Islamisation Yet!?

Nigeria, a nation known for its religious and ethnic diversity, has long grappled with the challenge of balancing its secular constitutional framework with the deep religious affiliations of its citizens. Over the years, concerns about the Islamization of Nigeria have been raised by various groups, particularly in relation to government policies, appointments, and the country’s international affiliations. One of the most controversial figures in this discussion is General Ibrahim Badamasi Babangida (IBB), Nigeria’s military ruler from 1985 to 1993.

During his rule, Babangida made several decisions that critics argue contributed to the gradual Islamization of Nigeria. From Nigeria’s membership in the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) to the expansion of Sharia courts in the northern states, his administration took steps that have had long-lasting religious and political implications. Despite these actions, Babangida has never openly admitted to having an agenda to Islamize Nigeria, nor has he provided a full explanation of his motivations.

The recent launch of his memoir, A Journey in Service, was expected to shed light on some of these controversies, as other issues as annulment of June 12, 1993 presidential election. However, rather than addressing the concerns directly, Babangida once again remained silent on the issue, choosing instead to focus on his broader legacy. This essay examines Babangida’s role in the Islamization debate, the policies he implemented, their consequences for Nigeria, and why his continued silence on the matter remains troubling for the country’s future.

The Concept of Islamization in Nigeria: Islamization, in the context of Nigeria, refers to the perceived efforts to impose Islamic laws, values, or governance structures in a way that influences national policies, political decisions, and public administration. Given that Nigeria is constitutionally a secular state with both Muslim and Christian populations, any move that appears to favor one religion over another is often met with suspicion and resistance.

While many argue that Islamization is an overblown narrative, others point to specific policies and decisions—especially during Babangida’s regime—that suggest a deliberate attempt to strengthen Nigeria’s Islamic identity within governance structures. The fear of Islamization is not limited to religious institutions; it extends to concerns about how religious biases might influence laws, public funds, international relations, and national unity.

Babangida and the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) Controversy:
One of the most controversial actions taken by Babangida during his time in office was Nigeria’s secretive entry into the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) in 1986. The OIC is an intergovernmental organization of Muslim-majority countries that seeks to promote Islamic solidarity and cooperation in political, economic, and cultural matters.

Prior to Babangida’s administration, Nigeria had maintained a neutral stance in global religious affairs, recognizing its diverse population. However, in January 1986, under Babangida’s leadership, Nigeria was quietly listed as a member of the OIC without prior debate or consultation with the National Assembly or the general public. This move sparked nationwide outrage, particularly among Christian leaders, who saw it as a violation of Nigeria’s secular principles.

The secrecy surrounding the decision further fueled suspicions. Why was Nigeria’s membership not openly debated? Why was there no official announcement until protests forced the government to acknowledge it? These unanswered questions remain part of Babangida’s legacy. His memoir, A Journey in Service, was expected to clarify his reasons for taking such a controversial step. However, he has continued to avoid the subject, leaving Nigerians to speculate on his true intentions.

Expansion of Sharia Law and Religious Appointments: Another key aspect of Babangida’s tenure was the expansion of Sharia law in the northern states. While Sharia law had existed in the north before his rule, his administration saw a notable increase in the influence of Islamic jurisprudence in governance. Babangida appointed several judges to Sharia courts and increased government funding for Islamic institutions, reinforcing the perception that his administration was leaning towards Islamic governance.

Additionally, several of Babangida’s key political appointments were seen as favoring Muslims, particularly from the northern region. While Nigeria has always had a history of ethnic and regional favoritism in politics, Babangida’s administration took it to a new level, raising concerns that non-Muslims were being systematically sidelined in key government positions.

The question then arises: Were these actions part of a broader agenda to Islamize Nigeria, or were they merely political decisions aimed at securing support from northern elites? Babangida’s refusal to address these concerns directly only deepens the mystery. His memoir, which was expected to provide insights into these policies, has failed to do so, leaving Nigerians to draw their own conclusions.

The Babangida-Era Religious Divide: Babangida’s policies significantly deepened Nigeria’s religious divide. Prior to his regime, religious tensions existed but had not yet reached the level of polarization seen today. His tenure marked the beginning of a more pronounced divide between Christians and Muslims in Nigerian politics, a divide that has persisted and even worsened over the years.

The OIC controversy, in particular, created a lasting distrust between religious groups. Many Christian leaders saw Babangida’s decision as proof that Nigerian Muslims were attempting to establish an Islamic state. This perception, whether accurate or not, led to a rise in Christian political activism, as religious leaders began to push back against perceived government bias.

Even after Babangida left office in 1993, his policies continued to shape Nigeria’s religious landscape. The north became more emboldened in pushing for greater Islamic influence, while the south became more vocal in resisting any perceived Islamization efforts. The result has been an increasingly divided country where religious identity plays a major role in political decision-making.

Babangida’s Silence: A Deliberate Strategy? One of the most frustrating aspects of Babangida’s legacy is his consistent refusal to address key issues directly. Throughout his political career, he has carefully avoided making definitive statements on controversial topics, preferring instead to speak in vague, diplomatic terms. His memoir, A Journey in Service, follows this same pattern.

Many Nigerians were hoping that Babangida would finally break his silence and provide a candid account of his role in Nigeria’s religious politics. However, rather than offering clarity, the book largely glosses over the controversies, focusing instead on his leadership philosophy and achievements. This strategic silence has allowed Babangida to avoid accountability while maintaining his status as a respected elder statesman.

But why is he still refusing to address these issues? One possible explanation is that Babangida understands the potential backlash that a full confession could bring. Admitting to a deliberate Islamization agenda would further damage his legacy and alienate a significant portion of the Nigerian population. On the other hand, denying any such agenda outright could lead to accusations of dishonesty, given the overwhelming evidence of his policies.

By choosing silence, Babangida has effectively left the interpretation of his legacy to history. However, history is rarely kind to those who fail to take responsibility for their actions.

In conclusion, the launch of A Journey in Service was an opportunity for Ibrahim Babangida to set the record straight on his contributions to the Islamization debate in Nigeria. Instead, it became yet another chapter in his long history of strategic silence. His refusal to address the OIC controversy, his role in the expansion of Sharia law, and his administration’s religious favoritism has only reinforced suspicions about his true intentions.

Whether or not Babangida deliberately sought to Islamize Nigeria, his policies undeniably contributed to the deep religious divisions that persist today. His silence on these issues is a disservice to Nigerians who seek the truth. If Nigeria is to move forward, it must confront its past honestly, and its leaders—past and present—must be willing to own up to their decisions.

Babangida may never confess to having an Islamization agenda, but history will continue to judge his actions. And as Nigeria struggles with religious tensions and national unity, his legacy remains a critical lesson in the dangers of blending religion with politics. The Christian community remains unhappy and the generations unborn will forever ask questions.

Prof. Funmilayo Adesanya-Davies, a Nigerian former female Presidential Candidate is a Professor of Applied Linguistics, a Political Analyst and a Public Commentator.