The heated debate over Sheikh Sani Yahaya Jingir’s controversial remarks has taken a new twist, with former presidential media aide Bashir Ahmad insisting that a Christian cleric has crossed even more offensive lines in the past. Ahmad’s response came after popular TV host Rufai Oseni posed a pointed question on social media: what would happen if a Christian leader had made similar statements?
Jingir, speaking in Kano State over the weekend, doubled down on his endorsement of a Muslim-Muslim presidential ticket for the 2027 elections. He reportedly leaned on population numbers to justify the All Progressives Congress’s approach, while also branding Christians as infidels and declaring that Nigeria belongs to Muslims. The fallout was swift, with widespread outrage and mounting calls for his arrest.
Oseni, known for his no-holds-barred style, took to his X handle on Tuesday night to challenge the double standard he sees in public reactions. “If a Christian cleric had said what Jingir said,” he wrote, leaving the implication hanging in the air.
But Ahmad, never one to shy away from a verbal spar, countered that the comparison misses the mark. “It is not a competition, Rufai, but I can tell you that Rev. Ezekiel Dachomo has said things that were even worse. Both utterances are wrong,” he wrote. The Plateau-based pastor, according to Ahmad, has a history of inflammatory rhetoric that rivals—or even surpasses—the latest uproar.
The exchange has ignited fresh debate about religious intolerance and the selective outrage that often accompanies such statements. While some see Jingir’s comments as a dangerous escalation, others point to a pattern of provocative speech on both sides of the faith divide. What remains clear is that the 2027 election cycle is already stirring deep tensions, and the battle for narrative control is just beginning.
