The meeting between President Tinubu and the Catholic Bishops may have produced disagreement, but disagreement is not a failure of democracy. The true test is whether that disagreement can lead to better understanding, better policies and better outcomes for the Nigerian people. Beyond politics lies conscience. And conscience reminds us that Nigeria’s future cannot be built by defeating one another.
By Shu’aibu Usman Leman
One of the unfortunate habits of our national conversation in Nigeria is the speed with which every important issue is turned into a political contest. Before facts are properly examined, before arguments are weighed on their merits, and before the lessons of an encounter are considered, society is often divided into familiar camps of supporters and critics, loyalists and opponents, those defending government and those questioning it. The recent meeting between President Bola Ahmed Tinubu and the Catholic Bishops Conference of Nigeria (CBCN) has followed this familiar pattern. Instead of becoming an opportunity for sober reflection about the condition of our nation, it has largely been reduced to another argument over who is right and who is wrong.
Yet, in my view, the significance of that meeting lies far beyond the immediate controversy. It was not simply an engagement between a President and a group of religious leaders. It was a moment where power encountered conscience; where the responsibilities of government met the concerns of citizens; and where Nigeria had an opportunity to examine the difficult balance between economic reform and human suffering.
READ ALSO:
Tinubu must match reform with results
The bishops did not go to the Presidential Villa as politicians seeking influence or as representatives of an opposition platform. They went as Shepherds who regularly encounter the realities of ordinary Nigerians. Through their churches, schools, hospitals and community engagements, they see families struggling with rising costs, young people uncertain about their future, communities affected by insecurity and citizens worried about the direction of the country. Their concerns were therefore not merely political statements; they were reflections of the experiences of the people they serve.
The Catholic Church’s engagement with national issues is not new. Across decades of military rule and democratic governance, the Church has consistently contributed to conversations about justice, accountability, good governance and the dignity of human life. It has challenged administrations across political divides and supported policies it believed served the common good.
That history is important because it reminds us that criticism of government is not automatically an act of opposition. In a democracy, a voice that questions authority can also be a voice seeking to strengthen it.
The issues raised by the bishops were matters that millions of Nigerians understand intimately. They spoke about insecurity, poverty, education, electoral credibility and the hardship that has accompanied recent economic reforms. These are not simply subjects for political debate; they are daily realities affecting households across the country. They determine whether families can afford food, whether young people can pursue education, whether businesses can survive and whether communities can live in safety.
At the same time, a fair assessment must recognise the position of the government. President Tinubu assumed office at a time when Nigeria was facing deep economic difficulties, including fiscal pressures, declining public revenues, insecurity and years of structural weaknesses. His administration has argued that reforms such as fuel subsidy removal and foreign exchange adjustments, though painful, were necessary to correct long-standing distortions and place the economy on a more sustainable path.
The challenge before Nigeria is to accept that two realities can exist at the same time. Citizens can be experiencing genuine hardship while government reforms are addressing genuine problems. Economic indicators can show signs of improvement while many households continue to struggle with the cost of living. A government can be pursuing necessary reforms while still being required to show greater sensitivity to the human consequences of those decisions.
This is where leadership is truly tested. The success of economic policy cannot be measured only by financial statistics, improved government revenue or international confidence. Those things matter, but they must eventually translate into better lives for ordinary Nigerians. The ultimate measure of reform is whether the market woman in Jos, the student in Owerri, the farmer in Benue, the worker in Lagos and the pensioner in Kano can feel a meaningful improvement in their daily lives.
The controversy that followed Cardinal John Onaiyekan’s interview after the meeting also deserves a balanced assessment. The Presidency argued that a private engagement should have remained private, while others believed that the public deserved to understand the concerns raised during a conversation involving national leadership. Both arguments raise legitimate questions about the relationship between confidentiality, transparency and public accountability.
However, the danger is that the disagreement over the aftermath of the meeting may distract from the more important issues that brought the Bishops and the President together. Nigeria’s challenges are too serious for national attention to focus only on statements, reactions and competing interpretations. The central question should remain on how government and society can work together to improve the lives of Nigerians?
The lesson for government is that criticism should not always be viewed as hostility. No administration has a complete understanding of every challenge facing a country as complex as Nigeria. Constructive voices from religious institutions, civil society, professional groups and ordinary citizens can help identify weaknesses and improve policies. Listening is not a sign of weakness; it is a demonstration of confidence and democratic maturity.
The lesson for the Church and other institutions of moral authority is equally important. Speaking truth to power requires courage, but it also requires fairness. The most effective criticism is not simply one that highlights failures; it is one that offers perspective, acknowledges progress where it exists and encourages solutions rather than division. Moral influence is strengthened when it is guided by wisdom and responsibility.
Citizens, too, must examine their own role in shaping national discourse. Too often, Nigerians judge issues through the lens of political loyalty rather than national interest. A good policy should not be rejected because it comes from a disliked government, and a poor policy should not be defended simply because it comes from a preferred leader. Democracy requires citizens who can think independently, ask difficult questions and judge leaders by results rather than rhetoric.
The true assessment of President Tinubu’s administration will not be determined by political arguments on television or social media. It will be determined by the experiences of ordinary Nigerians. The success of any government is measured by whether citizens feel safer, whether young people have opportunities, whether families can afford basic needs and whether hope is restored to communities across the country.
For me, the Tinubu–Bishops meeting should be seen as a mirror for Nigeria. It is a mirror for government, reminding leaders that power carries the responsibility to listen. It is a mirror for religious and civic institutions, reminding them that influence requires responsibility. It is also a mirror for citizens, reminding us that nation-building demands more than applause or criticism; it requires participation and commitment.
Nigeria does not need another political battle where every issue becomes a struggle between opposing camps. We need a culture of honest engagement, where leaders are willing to listen, institutions are willing to speak responsibly and citizens are willing to place national interest above political loyalty.
The meeting between President Tinubu and the Catholic Bishops may have produced disagreement, but disagreement is not a failure of democracy. The true test is whether that disagreement can lead to better understanding, better policies and better outcomes for the Nigerian people.
Beyond politics lies conscience. And conscience reminds us that Nigeria’s future cannot be built by defeating one another. It can only be built by recognising that, despite our differences, we share a common responsibility to create a nation where every citizen has the opportunity to live with dignity, security and hope.
