AMUPITAN: CAN CANNOT ADDRESS THE ISSUE – MURIC

‎‎ MUSLIM RIGHTS CONCERN (MURIC)

‎هيئة حقوق المسلمين

‎Motto: Dialogue, Not Violence

‎31^st January, 2026

‎‎PRESS RELEASE:

AMUPITAN: CAN CANNOT ADDRESS THE ISSUE – MURIC

‎

‎An Islamic human rights group, the Muslim Rights Concern (MURIC), has lashed out at the northern wing of the Christian Association of Nigeria (CAN) for defending the chairman of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), Professor Joash Amupitan, over the allegation of instigating the branding of Nigeria as a country of particular interest and orchestrating the fictitious and malicious Christian genocide narrative.

‎

‎In a statement circulated to newsmen on Saturday, 31st January, 2026 by the Executive Director of the group, Professor Ishaq Akintola, MURIC slammed Northern CAN for ignoring the substance while pursuing the shadow.

‎

‎The group continued:

‎

‎”Two days ago, precisely on Thursday, 29th January, 2026, the Christian Association of Nigeria (CAN), Northern wing, defended the chairman of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) over the allegation of instigating the branding of Nigeria as a country of particular interest and orchestrating a fictitious and malicious Christian genocide narrative.

‎

‎”In a press release signed on the issue, the Chairman of Northern CAN, Reverend Joseph John Hayab and the Secretary General, Bishop Mohammed Naga, accused the Supreme Council for Shari’ah in Nigeria (SCSN) of politicising religion. This was in response to the Council’s demand for Amupitan’s sack. (https://guardian.ng/news/can-condemns-shariah-councils-call-to-remove-amupitan/).

‎

‎”What we know of mature groups is that they confront issues directly and address them as presented while objective people review situations and separate emotions from facts. But in this case, CAN has elected to put its weight behind sentiment rather than reality. It has ignored the substance while pursuing mere shadow. CAN cannot address the issue.

‎

‎”We therefore put it to CAN that its approach is escapist, cowardly and emotion-laden. It will not sell. How can CAN leave the offender to query the whistle blower? What kind of examination malpractice panel will ignore the candidate who cheats to sanction the invigilator who merely did his job as required?

‎

‎”Who does that? How can CAN do this to Nigeria? How can CAN brush aside the issue of reporting Nigeria to America while focusing on those who interrogated the report as well as the reporter? How can CAN leave the tangential for the peripheral? How can CAN?

‎

‎”Instead of denying or confirming that Amupitan wrote the false and incriminating legal brief, CAN ignored the subject matter and turned round to accuse the Shari’ah Council of politicising religion. But is that the issue?

“The question is whether Amupitan wrote the legal brief or not. CAN sidestepped the issue, dribbling, gangling, grandstanding and maradonising. CAN cannot address the issue.

“Amupitan is only lucky that his Satanic brief was not uncovered until he was given the INEC appointment otherwise he would never have scaled through. But he does not have to be a Kenyan before knowing that it is not yet Uhuru.

‎

‎”It is now crystal clear that Northern CAN seeks to sweep Amupitan’s treasonable offence under the carpet. Yet Northern CAN knows that it is defending the indefensible. That is why it cannot mention the offence committed by Professor Amupitan. A man committed the grave offence of treason against his country, yet CAN is encouraging him. CAN is defending him.

‎

‎”Let us look around the world and see the fate of those who betrayed their countries? They were charged with treason, sedition or espionage and sentenced to long-term imprisonment or executed.

‎

‎”Edmund Campion, one of the Forty Martyrs of England and Wales, was executed in 1577 for high treason. Guy Fawkes, the English Catholic, was hanged for treason in 1606. The Norwegian Vidkun Quisling, though a former minister of defense in Norway, he later became a spy for the Nazis. He was executed after Germany surrendered in 1945, etc, etc.

“Yet we are not asking for the prosecution of Amupitan. No, we are not so vindictive. But only a fool is bitten in the same snake hole twice. We are simply expressing our fear. Nigerian Muslims do not trust this INEC boss, Professor Joash Amupitan. Give us another Christian (from the same North Central if you like). But for us, Amupitan is bad market. We will not touch him with a long pole. Or have we asked for too much?

‎

“A man who writes such frivolous fiction against peace-loving and law-abiding Muslims should not be allowed to decide the fate of the same Muslims. ‎It will amount to gross injustice, executive impunity and deliberate provocation if the Federal Government (FG) ignores the complaints of Muslims against Amupitan on this matter. Already, more than four mainstream Islamic organizations have demanded the removal of the INEC boss. The umbrella organization of Nigerian Muslims was the first to condemn his unpatriotic action.

“What else does CAN want to know about those opposing Amupitan’s headship of INEC? The Nigerian Supreme Council for Islamic Affairs  (NSCIA) condemned his legal brief.  The Shari’ah Council complained openly. MURIC demanded his removal three times within the last two months. The Muslim Media Watch Group (MMWG) called for his sack yesterday. What else does CAN want to know?

“All Muslim groups are saying the same thing, namely, Amupitan must go. He has become an existential threat to Islamdom as far as democratic enfranchisement is concerned. Our frank advice to FG is to let Amupitan go. We warn that no good surgeon will hesitate to amputate a rotten part of the anatomy knowing that failure to do so may cause the infection to spread to all parts of the body.

“The Northern Christian body also questioned the motive behind the demand for the removal of Amupitan and wanted to know those sponsoring the call and why such interests are hiding behind the platform of a religious body. We wonder who told CAN that we are in hiding.

“We are not hiding. Our identities are well known and we are speaking out loud and clear. We are exercising our fundamental human rights of freedom of expression. The champions of free speech in the United States and the European Union know it even if it is not in their cardinal principle that Muslims should enjoy such rights.

‎

‎”There is concrete evidence of the 80-page legal brief penned by Amupitan and it is replete with lies, hate speech and disdain for Northern Muslims. Amupitan himself has not denied it. ‎Even CAN avoided the main issue, neither denying nor confirming Amupitan’s spiteful, mean, petty and parochial petition.

‎

‎“We are not surprised anyway. We are not surprised that Northern CAN is supporting Amupitan. Didn’t CAN itself betray President Bola Ahmed Tinubu by the same attitude and with the same clandestine reports to the United States about Christian genocide in Nigeria?

“Was CAN unaware of the likely backlash on the Nigerian leader and the generality of the Nigerian people, if not a la Panama, then a la Venezuela? But did the thought hold them back? A president who risked everything, a man who bent over backwards to give them almost all the gold and diamond in the land of the rising sun was betrayed by them. So what are we saying?

“We are worried that Northern CAN leadership has failed to learn from the pages of the Bible: Judas betrayed Jesus (peace be upon him Mathew 26:47-56). Joseph was betrayed by his brothers (Genesis 37:23-28). Samson was betrayed by Delilah (Judges 16:4-21) while David was given away by his own son Absalom (2 Samuel 15-18). Yet our neighbours will not ponder over the fate of those biblical traitors.

“Already, many Nigerians are asking: Et tu CAN? But MURIC is not surprised. Birds of the same feather flock together. Treachery is in some people’s Deoxyribonucleic Acid (DNA.). Like Quisling, like Guy Fawkes. Like Amupitan, like Northen CAN. CAN is beating around the bush. CAN cannot address the issue. No, CAN cannot.”

#CANAddressTheIssue

‎#CANCannot

‎Professor Ishaq Akintola,

‎Founder/Executive Director,

‎Muslim Rights Concern (MURIC).