Unending war between FRC, churches, mosques

• It Is Not Possible Because Matter Is In Court And Nobody Has Right To Talk About It Again — Adegbite
• There Is Need For Extensive Community Engagement Before Releasing New Governance Code Being
Packaged For Not-for-Profit Organisations Such As Mosques, Churches — Musa
• ‘Government And The Church Should Endeavour To Do What Is Right, Just In Sight Of God And Man — Nwaobia
• If Stakeholders Are Not Consulted, The Council May Be Biting More Than It Can Chew — Uhor
• ‘That Should Not Give Government Right To Believe That It Has The Prerogative Of Managing Churches
In Same Way It Manages Companies Or Public Institutions — Martins’

The decision of the Financial Reporting Council (FRC), under the watchful eyes of Jim Obazee, to unveil its code, has continued to elicit some reactions from different religious leaders, who spoke with The Guardian on phone.

Recalled that the FRC’s law stipulates that heads of registered churches and mosques including not-for-profit organisations should have a maximum period of 20 years in office, which forced the General Overseer of the Redeemed Christian Church of God (RCCG), Pastor Enoch Adeboye, to step aside and appointed a successor in 2017.

The same provision also put pressure on other general overseers in same category with Pastor Adeboye. However, because of the controversy the Act generated then, the Federal Government, during President Muhammadu Buhari administration, suspended the FRC’s Act, citing some irregularities in its operations.

Some of the respondents argued that they would resist FRC’s decision to impose any code in the operation of the church and the mosque. The Chairman, Lagos State Chapter of Christian Association of Nigeria (CAN), Dr. Stephen Adegbite, noted that when the Act was first introduced, the Christian body resisted it and took the matter to court to press its demands.

He said: “In the first instance, when the first one was introduced we said to them ab initio that we are not going to accept it and that was why we took the Act to court. We won at the High Court, we won at the Appeal Court, and we are now at the Supreme Court, so, there is no way they will bring anything to regulate the church and mosque that will not be acceptable by the religious bodies in Nigeria. If there are people who don’t have accountability in their own establishment, they can go after such people but every Orthodox Church has a management and you must give account of your stewardship every year. Your account must be audited and account must be approved by the members and clergy of the church. Every diocese has regulation there are regulatory bodies that manages the church from the local church to the diocesan level, from diocesan to archdiocesan level and to the Conference level and that is what you find in the orthodox churches.

“If there is one-man church who does not have such and you have discovered any misappropriation of funds or whatever. They can look into that but that they will subject the church to any regulation and control, it has never happened in Nigeria and it’s not going to happen and we are not going to accept that. So, let the government do their own job, and the church will do its job. And Christian Association of Nigeria (CAN) has taken that particular Act to court and we have said that what they want to do in CAMA is not acceptable by the church.”

Adegbite, who welcomes FRC’s decision to unveil any code, however, said if it is against the church or the mosque, the courts are there to settle their differences and nobody could deny them the right to sue for any fringes committed against the religious bodies in Nigeria.

“The church has the right to sue anybody and nobody can deny the church that right or the mosque. If there are things in our constitution and they are not acceptable we will resolve them in the court of law. Any code they want to unveil they can unveil but once it is not acceptable to us we know the next thing to be done.” He also wondered why FRC should come up with unveiling of code when it is obvious to them that the matter is still pending in the Supreme Court. Adegbite said: “It is not possible because the matter is in court and nobody has the right to talk about it again until we meet at the Supreme Court.”

In his submission and what he knew about the FRC’s code, the Chief Imam of University of Lagos (UNILAG) Muslim Community, Prof. Ismail Musa, recalled reports in the media, indicating that the new code would focus on digitisation, operational excellence, stakeholder engagement and enforcement. According to him, the FRC’s focus on digitisation, among others, are lofty ideals.

Musa said: “Reports in the media indicate that the new code would focus on digitisation, operational excellence, stakeholder engagement and enforcement. These are lofty ideals.”

Urging all and sundry to avoid controversial issues generated by the suspended code to make it work for all stakeholders, the Chief Imam called for extensive community engagement before releasing the new governance code being packaged for not-for-profit organisations such as mosques and churches.

He said: “There is need for extensive community engagement before releasing the new governance code being packaged for not-for-profit organisations such as mosques and churches.

“If the FRC code is about discipline and standard, no mosque or church should have any objections to it because they form part of the main values they preach on a daily basis,” Musa added.

Archbishop of Aba Ecclesiastical Province/Bishop, Diocese of Isiala Ngwa South, Church of Nigeria (Anglican Communion), Most Rev. (Dr.) Isaac Chijioke Nwaobia stated that the FRC’s decision on churches in Nigeria has political undertone.

Nwaobia, who is, however, calling on the Christian Association of Nigeria (CAN), the umbrella body of Christians in the land to wade into the matter, said: “The decision of FRC on churches in Nigeria has political undertone.

“However, the leadership of Christian Association of Nigeria (CAN), will come out with the final position of the church in Nigeria on this.” He said that the government and the church should endeavour to do what is right and just in the sight of God and man.

Also, the State Islamic Leader/Vice President General Rivers State Council for Islamic Affairs/Chairman, Association of South-South Muslim Ummah, Alhaj (Amb) Nasir Awhelebe Uhor, berated the decision of FRC to interfere in the affairs of the leadership of both bodies, stressing that if the activities of the churches and mosques are not breaching the peace and safety of the public why should they interfere in their matter.

“How churches and mosques are run should attract regulatory attention only where their activities disdain public peace and safety; where what their clerics and scholars put out from the pulpits hold public safety in scant regard. This also includes what high level government officials, who have access to pulpits, are allowed to spew out,” Uhor said.

The State Islamic Leader, however, submitted that if the Council’s decision would benefit the religious bodies, then, the stakeholders should be consulted and the matter should be discussed widely.

Uhor said: “However, where proponents of the Council hold that there is far much good in it, then such good must be tabled and ventilated widely in the religious public domain to allow for such enlightenment that will sway overwhelming peoples’ opinion its way. Other or less than this, the Council may be biting far more than it can chew.”

The Catholic Archbishop of Lagos, His Grace, Most Rev. (Dr.) Alfred Adewale Martins, argued that church institutions are not companies and they are not in any way limited or unlimited institutions, adding that the rules and regulations governing government companies and financial institutions cannot apply to the church. He said any attempt to apply the rules of administration of public companies and the rest of it, to the church is bound to fail, because the rules and the ethics are very different.

He said: “The church institutions are not companies; they are neither limited nor unlimited institutions and therefore, the rules and regulations that govern government companies and financial institutions cannot apply to the church. Any effort to try and apply the rules of administration of public companies and the rest of it, to the church is bound to run into big problem and it cannot succeed because the rules and the ethics are very different. The purpose for their establishment are very different and certainly the rules of one cannot govern the other.”

Martins, however, cautioned the church to pay attention to the rules regarding transparency, accountability and honesty, adding that churches in their different circumstances must pay attention to that. He also urged the government not to believe it has the prerogative of managing churches in same way it manages companies that are public institutions.

“So to that extent, we must insist on that but that should not give government the right or the duty to believe that it has the prerogative of managing churches in same way it manages companies that are either public institutions in that direction. So, the effort is bound to meet a failure because public institutions, their purposes and goals are different from that of churches.”

Urging FRC to make its plans public and clear to the stakeholders, Martins said: “The fact is that the action of FRC itself cannot be sustained. I do not know exactly the bottomline of what they are planning but it should be made public so that everybody can respond to it, reflect on it and make input as well. Whatever regulations are going to be made have to be just.

“The rules and regulations that apply to companies cannot be applied to institutions such as the church because their goals and purposes are different from that of companies. Their purposes and operations are different from companies and government cannot make regulations in that kind of regard in any legitimate way.”