Catholic Priest Rejects Presidency’s Attack on Cardinal Onaiyekan
A Catholic priest, Fr. Ugochukwu Ugwoke, has defended Cardinal John Onaiyekan against criticism from the Presidency, dismissing claims that the former Archbishop of Abuja acted improperly by speaking publicly following a private meeting between President Bola Tinubu and members of the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of Nigeria (CBCN).
The defence came in the form of a point-by-point response to an opinion article authored by Senior Special Assistant to the President on Media and Publicity, Temitope Ajayi, titled “Cardinal Onaiyekan’s Abuse of Clerical Privilege.” Ajayi had accused Cardinal Onaiyekan of breaching the confidentiality and dignity of the meeting by granting an interview on Arise Television in which he discussed the president’s reaction to concerns raised during the July 28 engagement at the State House. Sahara Reporters
Fr. Ugwoke rejected the allegation outright, arguing that neither Nigerian law nor Catholic teaching prohibits bishops from publicly discussing matters of national importance following meetings with government officials. He insisted that the meeting was neither confidential nor protected by any legal or moral obligation of secrecy, maintaining that constitutional democracy allows respectful dialogue between religious leaders and civil authorities to continue in public settings when appropriate, not only behind closed doors. Sahara Reporters
The controversy stems from Onaiyekan’s remarks that President Tinubu had directly pushed back against concerns the bishops raised during the meeting, including the state of the economy, insecurity, and what the clerics described as a creeping danger of one-party political dominance. According to Onaiyekan, Tinubu appeared visibly unhappy during portions of the discussion and insisted his administration remained on the right track despite the bishops’ assessment.
The exchange has drawn in other political figures. African Democratic Congress (ADC) presidential candidate Atiku Abubakar condemned the Presidency’s response to Onaiyekan, describing it through his spokesman, Phrank Shaibu, as evidence of the Tinubu administration’s growing intolerance of dissent. Shaibu argued that the Presidency was not a secret cult where only approved voices are permitted to speak, and demanded that the government issue an unreserved apology to the Catholic Church.
The Presidency, through Special Adviser on Policy Communication, Daniel, had separately pushed back on the cardinal’s broader remarks, arguing that Onaiyekan spoke for Catholics rather than for Christians as a whole, and suggesting his intervention was more political than spiritual in nature. Daniel maintained that the president was well within his rights to disagree with the bishops’ economic assessment, arguing Tinubu’s position was grounded in verifiable data rather than sentiment.
The disagreement has continued to generate wider debate across Nigeria’s political and religious circles, with the underlying dispute over the propriety of publicly discussing private government meetings with religious leaders remaining unresolved as both sides maintain their positions.
About the Author
