The Presidency on Saturday slammed representatives of the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of Nigeria over their conduct during a recent meeting with President Bola Tinubu, insisting that the clerics were not the sole custodians of truth on the state of the nation.
It also faulted the Archbishop Emeritus of the Catholic Archdiocese of Abuja, Cardinal John Onaiyekan, for publicly disclosing details of the closed-door meeting, describing his comments as inappropriate and a breach of the confidentiality expected of such high-level engagements.
In separate statements on Saturday, presidential aides Temitope Ajayi and Daniel Bwala defended Tinubu’s response to the bishops’ criticism of his administration, arguing that the clerics’ assessment of the country’s economy, security and governance reflected only one perspective and was open to scrutiny and rebuttal.
The Presidency’s reaction followed comments made by Onaiyekan during an interview on Prime Time, an Arise Television programme aired on Friday, in which he revealed details of the meeting between Tinubu and a delegation of the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of Nigeria at the Presidential Villa on July 28.
During the interview, the cardinal said the bishops raised concerns over worsening economic hardship, insecurity and the state of democracy in the country but that the President rejected their assessment, insisting that his administration was making progress.
According to Onaiyekan, the bishops’ position was not a personal opinion.
He stressed that the document presented to the President reflected the collective position of the conference and was carefully prepared after rigorous deliberations.
“Let me say first and foremost that that statement read by our president was not just put together at random. It was carefully considered and with wide consultation. The Bishops’ Conference is bigger than the group of us that were there, but it is very representative of the Bishops’ Conference.
“So, it is the Catholic Bishops’ Conference that produced that document. It was written, rewritten and corrected. So it was not done at random, nor did we deliver it with levity,” he said.
The cleric maintained that the bishops had no political ambitions or personal interests to protect but were compelled by their moral obligation to speak honestly about the suffering of Nigerians.
“I think I have an opportunity in this programme to remind Nigerians that, as bishops, we have no ambitions to take Mr Tinubu’s job or anybody else’s job. We are not politicians running for office.
“We are, first and foremost, religious leaders who feel we have a duty—not just to preach our religious doctrines, but also to address the lives of our people, both those who are our members and those who are not. You can see that from the content and the tone of our statement,” Onaiyekan said.
He disclosed that the bishops told Tinubu that prevailing economic policies were worsening the plight of ordinary Nigerians, but the President insisted that the economy was improving under his administration.
According to him, the bishops deliberately presented what they believed was the reality confronting Nigerians rather than offering the President a flattering account of the country’s situation.
“When the nation is bleeding, you cannot expect a polite meeting with the head of state. We told him the economy is not helping our poor people; he told us the economy is doing fine. Frankly speaking, he told us quite clearly that he did not agree with us.
“We didn’t expect him to agree with us. We have done our duty, we have delivered our message, and we have a feeling that, somehow, along the line, somebody will show him a few of the things we said.
“We are not politicians running for office. We are religious leaders who feel we have a duty not just to preach our doctrines but also to address the lives of our people,” he added.
The cardinal further revealed that, judging by his reaction during the meeting, Tinubu appeared unhappy with the observations.
“You asked me what I saw on the face of the President in reaction. I was not surprised that he was not looking very happy, nor were his colleagues who were there.
“We knew that this was different from the kind of statements that our President keeps receiving from all kinds of people. That is one of the things that worries us: there are so many people hanging around Mr President, giving him a rosy picture of what the country is, which it is not.
“We felt that we had a duty not to do that. Indeed, we have the obligation to help him appreciate the reality of the situation in which we find ourselves. That is the reality that we painted, which I know is not the kind of thing that he wanted to hear. And his reply showed that very clearly,” Onaiyekan said.
Reacting to the interview, Ajayi, the Senior Special Assistant to the President on Media and Publicity, criticised the bishops for focusing on the country’s challenges while paying little attention to what he described as the achievements of the Tinubu administration.
He said the bishops had sought the audience with the President and were given the opportunity to express their views freely, adding that Tinubu listened patiently and responded with facts.
“Except for their grudging acknowledgement of the benefits of NELFUND, they were dismissive of the other great things done by the administration. The bishops were notably acerbic in their submission, but the President listened to them patiently and responded.
“That should ordinarily have been where the matter rested. None of the issues raised by the bishops is beyond scrutiny or rebuttal. Their assessment is neither scripture nor an article of faith. It is a perspective, and perspectives can be challenged with facts and evidence,” Ajayi said.
He argued that there had been measurable improvements in the country, particularly in the regular payment of salaries and pensions, saying the gains should not be dismissed simply because significant challenges remained.
“They know, from lived experience rather than official pronouncements, that there has been real relief in the regular payment of salaries and pensions. While this does not erase the discomfort many Nigerians still face, it is wrong to dismiss or ignore those improvements casually.
“So, when President Tinubu reminded the bishops of these facts during the meeting, he was not, as Cardinal Onaiyekan later suggested, being aloof or dismissive. He was presenting evidence to support his argument that the country is not standing still. A disagreement over facts should not be interpreted as arrogance,” he added.
Ajayi also rejected the bishops’ characterisation of Nigeria as “bleeding,” insisting that while the President acknowledged the country’s numerous challenges, his assessment was informed by classified intelligence and operational reports unavailable to the general public.
According to him, Tinubu receives daily intelligence briefings covering security, economic and social issues, in addition to monitoring developments through newspapers, television reports and consultations with stakeholders.
“The President argued that the bishops’ characterisation of the country’s current condition was incomplete and, in several respects, inaccurate. He pointed to measurable progress on the economic, social and security fronts.
“He did not pretend that Nigeria’s problems had disappeared. He acknowledged that significant economic and security challenges remain. His point was that the country has emerged from a dark tunnel, that his administration has laid the foundations for recovery, and that the next phase is to ensure the greatest number of Nigerians feel the gains.
“It is easy to compile a list of national problems. It is far more difficult to acknowledge the disasters that have been averted. Whatever anyone thinks of President Tinubu’s policies, it is impossible to ignore the fiscal crisis he inherited and the measures taken to pull the country away from the edge of a financial cliff.
“Even the bishops themselves should recognise that one tangible consequence has been the restoration of greater fiscal stability across many states,” Ajayi said.
According to Ajayi, the President reads 10 newspapers daily and watches television, including taking advice from friends and associates.
“Against that background, the suggestion that President Tinubu somehow needs only the Catholic Bishops to acquaint him with the truth is an overreach. They are an important constituency, but they are by no means the exclusive custodians of the national mood or the nation’s conscience,” he added.
On his part, the Special Adviser to the President on Policy Communication, Daniel Bwala, accused Onaiyekan of allowing politics to influence his comments.
Bwala alleged that the Catholic Church had openly supported the Labour Party presidential candidate, Peter Obi, during the 2023 general election, arguing that the cardinal’s intervention should therefore be viewed within that context.
“Cardinal Onaiyekan wasn’t speaking for Christians; he was speaking for Catholics, the very institution rooting for Peter Obi.
“Therefore, the Cardinal is more political than spiritual. And not all Catholic members are supporting Peter Obi. The President was well within his right to disagree with their assertion regarding Nigeria’s economy based purely on facts, statistics and numbers put into context,” he said.
Bwala further accused the cleric of applying a double standard by encouraging believers to make positive confessions despite difficult circumstances while criticising the government’s optimistic assessment of the economy.
“Ironically, the same priest would rebuke their members if they said, ‘We are suffering’ or ‘We are poor.’ They would tell them to say instead, ‘We are doing great’ or ‘We are rich,’ even when they are suffering or poor,” he added.
He also maintained that the wider Christian community was represented by several other Christian organisations apart from the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of Nigeria, insisting that many of those bodies had remained politically neutral.
When contacted, the Bishop of the Roman Catholic Diocese of Sokoto, Matthew Kukah, who was part of the delegation, declined further comment on the visit.
The cleric said, “I don’t have a comment to make. I was part of the delegation; how can I have a position? I am sorry.”
Meanwhile, the Lagos Central Senatorial candidate of the Nigeria Democratic Congress (NDC), Ladipo Johnson, criticised Tinubu for suggesting that Nigerians experiencing hardship should seek assistance from churches.
In a statement on Saturday, Johnson described the President’s remarks during his meeting with the bishops as “a shocking low point in the history of presidential communication.”
He accused Tinubu of abdicating his constitutional responsibility to provide leadership and solutions to the country’s economic challenges.
Johnson also alleged that the President’s response reflected “complete disregard for the electorate,” arguing that it demonstrated a worrying lack of empathy for millions of Nigerians struggling with rising food prices, inflation and declining purchasing power.
