When prominent public figures choose to downplay or delegitimize actual, documented acts of violence, they inadvertently and tragically encourage the perpetrators. If victims’ genuine experiences are casually dismissed as mere theatrics, it severely weakens the public resolve to firmly demand justice and tragically creates an atmosphere where systemic impunity can thrive unchallenged.
By Shu’aibu Usman Leman
Public discourse in Nigeria is rarely short of drama or strong opinions, yet occasionally a statement surfaces that manages to pierce the national conscience and compel a moment of profound reflection upon our collective values. Sheikh Ahmad Gumi’s assertion—that Christian communities across the Middle Belt region have been “staging” mass killings by interring empty coffins—is precisely one such deeply troubling and inflammatory claim. It is not merely unfounded but is also profoundly insensitive and callous towards the countless families who are still grappling with the genuine, painful losses of their loved ones.
In a nation where profound tragedy has become an alarmingly common occurrence, the suggestion that victims are merely imaginary or that public bereavement is a choreographed, elaborate performance is both utterly shocking and deeply disturbing. A huge swathe of the Nigerian populace has been forced to bury people dear to them—parents, children, and neighbours—all tragically taken by relentless violence and who simply never returned home. To so casually trivialise their suffering is nothing less than to reopen deep emotional wounds that have barely begun their slow, arduous process of healing.
While it is entirely understandable that Nigerians may engage in a robust debate over appropriate terminology—whether the persistent and devastating killings in the Middle Belt region genuinely constitute an act of genocide is a legitimate academic and policy discussion—the actual existence of the killings themselves is not a matter open to credible debate. These ongoing tragedies are meticulously recorded and documented by local communities, extensive media reporting, and various civil society organisations, forming an undeniable, painful part of our shared living national reality.
READ ALSO:
Re-thinking the Sheikh Gumi proposition
Entire regions spanning Plateau, Benue, Southern Kaduna, and sections of Taraba State bear visible, deep scars that testify to years of repeated, devastating attacks. The graves are tangibly real; the resultant widows, orphans, and permanently displaced families are absolutely not participants in some sort of elaborate staged event. To recklessly deny the authenticity and scale of their loss is to deny them their fundamental humanity and dignity.
Understandably, Christian leaders responded to Gumi’s allegations with justifiable outrage. Reverend Ezekiel Dachomo’s public, solemn offer to personally escort Gumi to the mass grave sites speaks volumes about the depth of the hurt and offence that this reckless statement has caused. When a respected religious leader expresses a readiness to physically open graves in the presence of security agencies, purely to definitively prove that they contain actual, real victims, it powerfully illustrates just how damaging and corrosive such careless remarks can be to national cohesion.
The Pentecostal Fellowship of Nigeria (PFN) echoed this widespread sentiment, accurately describing Gumi’s remarks as being both deeply inflammatory and baseless. Their sharp reaction reflects the broader and entirely reasonable expectation that religious leaders, by virtue of their influence, must exercise the utmost levels of caution, empathy, and social responsibility. Thoughtless or careless words from such influential voices can rapidly deepen mistrust between groups and significantly heighten social tensions across the country.
Nigeria’s vast diversity ought to be a foundational source of national strength, yet it far too frequently becomes a painful fault line when leaders deliberately or carelessly fuel suspicion or resentment. Irresponsible, unverified public statements can very quickly harden attitudes, needlessly escalate long-standing communal grievances, and fundamentally undermine crucial peacebuilding efforts across numerous communities.
What makes this particular allegation especially unfortunate is its truly inopportune timing. Nigeria is currently grappling with a multiplicity of overlapping, severe crises—rampant banditry in the North West, a persistent insurgency in the North East, and the recurring, savage violence that plagues the Middle Belt. The entire security system is severely stretched, communities are gripped by anxiety, and public confidence is extremely fragile. In such delicate, volatile conditions, rhetoric that is designed to, or succeeds in, simply inflaming emotions only serves to dangerously complicate the already difficult search for lasting solutions.
Instead of refocusing the national attention squarely on the urgent need for security reforms and necessary strategic overhauls, such provocative statements senselessly drag the country into unnecessary and distracting controversy. They critically shift the focus away from the practical, concrete steps that are desperately needed to effectively address the systemic root causes of insecurity, such as dramatically strengthening intelligence gathering, significantly expanding community policing initiatives, and tackling the fundamental root causes of the pervasive violence.
When prominent public figures choose to downplay or delegitimize actual, documented acts of violence, they inadvertently and tragically encourage the perpetrators. If victims’ genuine experiences are casually dismissed as mere theatrics, it severely weakens the public resolve to firmly demand justice and tragically creates an atmosphere where systemic impunity can thrive unchallenged.
These irresponsible remarks also carry serious international implications. Global observers and humanitarian organisations have repeatedly raised grave concerns regarding the sheer scale of violence in Nigeria. Reckless, unsubstantiated statements risk severely misleading the international community at a time when Nigeria desperately requires genuine credibility, international cooperation, and sustained support to effectively navigate its extraordinarily complex security challenges.
The concerns raised abroad are absolutely not fabricated. They arise directly from years of documented attacks, widespread humanitarian crises, and massive displacement figures. Regardless of any disagreements over specific labels or classifications, the devastating violence itself is undeniable and continues to attract significant global attention because of its horrific human toll.
Yet, even when confronting such reckless, divisive rhetoric, Nigerians must strive to avoid equally divisive counter-responses. The statement of a single individual—no matter how prominent or influential—should never be allowed to profoundly deepen existing religious or ethnic divisions. Pain, fundamentally, has no tribe; sorrow knows no creed. Communities that are in mourning deserve our collective solidarity, not further sectarian blame.
This delicate moment demands leadership that transcends mere emotion and stands firmly and unequivocally on the side of truth. Leaders across the religious, traditional, and civic sectors must step up to help correct misinformation, actively reduce tensions, and consistently promote narratives that build bridges rather than break them down. Nigeria cannot afford any further fragmentation.
With great influence inevitably comes great responsibility. Words spoken impulsively, carelessly, or even maliciously can instantly inflame divisions, rigidly harden prejudices, and dangerously destabilise already vulnerable regions. At a time when national trust is perceptibly eroding, leaders must fully appreciate the immense weight of their utterances
Progress requires a deep, unwavering commitment to truth, fairness, and justice. Every single act of violence must be acknowledged and condemned, without exception, regardless of who the victims or the perpetrators may be. Only through firm impartiality can we ever hope to build a security framework that genuinely protects all Nigerians.
As a society, we owe the dead a basic level of respect and dignity. The memory of victims should never be exploited or dismissed simply to score cheap rhetorical points. Every single grave dug represents a profound national failure and a family’s irreparable heartbreak. To attempt to deny their existence is to deliberately diminish our shared humanity.
Genuine healing demands profound compassion. It requires thoughtfully listening to survivors, firmly affirming their pain, and actively resisting the temptation to politicise tragedies. Crucially, it also requires the courage to challenge falsehoods with utter clarity and firmness.
Nigeria, at this exceptionally delicate juncture, needs calm and principled voices. We need leaders who truly grasp that carelessness in speech can violently deepen wounds that already run terrifyingly deep. Our current national challenges are simply too complex and too severe to be casually trivialised by sensational, unverified claims.
The families who are grieving across the Middle Belt, the North West, and the North East deserve nothing less than the truth, dignity, and justice—not denial, distortion, or exploitation. Our duty as Nigerians is to stand with them, honour their pain, and ensure that their profound losses are never questioned nor exploited. Only then can we genuinely hope to usher in a period of meaningful healing and begin to build a nation where every life truly matters.
