HURIWA defends Onaiyekan, knocks Tinubu’s aides over criticism

The Human Rights Writers Association of Nigeria (HURIWA) has defended the Archbishop Emeritus of the Catholic Archdiocese of Abuja, John Cardinal Onaiyekan, following criticism by two presidential aides over comments he made after a meeting between President Bola Tinubu and the Catholic Bishops Conference of Nigeria (CBCN).

The rights group accused the presidential aides of showing disrespect to the senior cleric, insisting that Cardinal Onaiyekan acted in the public interest by speaking on issues affecting Nigerians.

In a statement issued on Sunday and signed by its National Coordinator, Comrade Emmanuel Onwubiko, HURIWA criticised Special Adviser to the President on Policy Communication, Daniel Bwala, and Senior Special Assistant to the President on Media and Publicity, Temitope Ajayi, over their reactions to the cardinal’s television interview.

The group was reacting to comments made by the two presidential aides after Cardinal Onaiyekan granted an interview analysing the recent meeting between President Tinubu and members of the Catholic Bishops Conference of Nigeria at the Presidential Villa, Abuja.

While Bwala reportedly argued that the cleric only expressed the views of Catholics, Ajayi faulted the cardinal for publicly discussing what he described as a private engagement with the President.

Ajayi had maintained that the bishops fulfilled their moral responsibility by presenting their concerns to President Tinubu, while the President responded to the issues raised in the spirit of constitutional democracy.

He argued that “reciprocity should have dictated that the confidentiality and dignity of that engagement be preserved,” adding that it was inappropriate for a participant to appear on national television to give his account of the discussions.

Ajayi further contended that clerical office carries privileges, but it also imposes obligations, stressing that religious leaders should exercise restraint when dealing with matters of state.

However, HURIWA dismissed the criticism, describing it as unfair and disrespectful to a respected statesman and cleric.

The organisation said Cardinal Onaiyekan has, over several decades, built a reputation for speaking truth to power irrespective of the government in office.

According to the group, the cardinal’s remarks reflected the concerns of millions of Nigerians grappling with poverty and economic hardship rather than the views of Catholics alone.

“It is unfortunate that the two presidential aides chose to attack one of Nigeria’s most respected clerics. Cardinal Onaiyekan spoke in the

best

public interest and for millions of Nigerians affected by multidimensional poverty, irrespective of their religion or ethnicity,” HURIWA said.
The group also argued that the criticisms portrayed the presidential aides as lacking sufficient understanding of Nigeria’s political history.

It noted that Cardinal Onaiyekan had engaged successive Nigerian presidents over several decades and had consistently maintained an independent voice on national issues.

HURIWA also rejected Ajayi’s assertion that the interview amounted to a breach of privilege, pointing out that the meeting between President Tinubu and the Catholic bishops was widely covered by the media and that the positions expressed by both sides were already in the public domain.

It added that several political leaders, including former Vice President Atiku Abubakar and Labour Party presidential candidate Peter Obi, had also publicly commented on the issues arising from the meeting.

Questioning the basis for the criticism, the group asked whether the engagement was a secret meeting or whether participants had been placed under any confidentiality obligation.

“How did the Archbishop Emeritus abuse any privilege? Was the meeting a secret conversation? Is President Tinubu not the President of all Nigerians, and are the Catholic bishops not spiritual leaders of millions of citizens?” HURIWA asked.

The organisation maintained that Cardinal Onaiyekan deserved commendation rather than criticism for using the interview to advocate free, fair, peaceful and transparent elections ahead of the 2027 general election.

It added that public officials should welcome constructive criticism from respected national figures instead of attacking those who express views on issues of national importance.