•Akinola Pix:Sun News Publishing

More Stories on This Section

Finally, the momentous event was here penultimate week. President of the Christian Association of Nigeria (CAN) and Primate of the Anglican Church, Right Reverend Peter Jasper Akinola bade farewell to the Secretariat he had led for nearly four years.

Bishop John Onaiyekan, Metropolitan Catholic Archbishop of Abuja stepped in as the new helmsman for Nigerian Christians.
Arch Bishop Onaiyekan scored 10 votes to Bishop Akinola’s four in the shadow election; secured 58 to 22, to stop the latter from elongating his tenure, and finally removed him as President of CAN with 72 to 33 votes.

As Onaiyekan settles for the leadership of CAN, there are many lessons to learn from the intrigues that characterize the elections in the Christendom. Quite unlike the pious way an election of men of God should be, it wore a semblance of an election organized by ambitious political gladiators.

On assumption of office nearly four years ago, Bishop Akinola set for himself a programme that reveals his deep sense of commitment and humane disposition to the cause of Christendom anywhere in the country. He had pledged among other things to uphold the tenets of Christendom and pursue projects that would uplift Christianity. That was three years ago.

But the cleric’s quest to fulfill all these waned when he began to nurse the ambition of a second term in office. Thus, politics set in, and the five church groups that makeup the CAN became polarized. Indeed, never in the history of CAN had any leader attempted to retain power or assume leadership of the Christian body than in the recent past.
One of the delegates to the election captured the mood vividly: “We have never had it like this; our CAN leaders spending so much to remain in office. (Cardinal) Olubunmi Okogie and (Dr) Sunday Mbang did not lobby anybody to become CAN President. We literally forced them to accept the leadership of CAN.”

The statement illustrates what happened at the election venue in Abuja. The atmosphere was charged. It was politics galore. While Akinola’s men hustled delegates for votes, nothing was heard from the Onaiyekan camp. Some delegates were reportedly lodged in a Hotel in Wuse Zone 2 allegedly at the expense of the departing cleric. And then high level lobbying began. It was a game Onaiyekan and his coterie didn’t understand.


By 10 am on the D-day, even before the delegates had settled down for business, it was clear that Akinola’s foot soldiers had lobbied almost all the delegates. Accompanied by some Anglican priests, Akinola ordered commencement of the events leading to the elections. Reverend Dr. Okoye, Chaplain of Aso Rock Chapel, had hardly finished his exaltations when Akinola took the stage. What the delegates thought was a mere opening speech turned out to be a campaign of some sort. Akinola reeled out a long list of his achievements, which included the completion of the National Christian Centre, the multi-purpose car park within the centre, car gifts to CAN by some state governors and his numerous visits to the Sultan of Sokoto.
With the speech, the stage was set for the business of the day. But it was the turn of the Secretary of the Electoral College, Apostle Osu from the Organization of African Instituted Churches (OAIC), who presented the result of the shadow election – Onaiyekan 10; Akinola four - thus providing the basis for opposition by Akinola’s men.
One of them raised a motion calling on delegates to allow the CAN President continue in office in recognition of his “good works”. The motion was seconded by a delegate from the Christian Churches of Nigeria (CCN). However, the motion was countered by a female delegate representing the Catholic Secretariat of Nigerian (CSN). According to the female delegate, it was only proper to crown Arch. Bishop John Onaiyekan the new President of CAN as he defeated Akinola in the shadow election. She found support in one of the OAIC members. There was a deadlock.

Dissatisfied with the direction of the debate, Akinola described the second motion, which called for Onaiyekan’s Presidency of the association, as unconstitutional. His statement generated further controversy, culminating in another motion which sought to establish the mood of the delegates – whether to hold the election or not. Akinola was defeated by 58 to 22 votes. Thus ended the tenure elongation gambit.

Constitutionally, CAN leadership is limited to Spiritual Heads or Leaders not below the rank of Bishop or its equivalent with not less than 15 years service in the particular church denomination.
Candidates for CAN Presidency must also represent one of the established five church groups.
The National Secretary of CAN, Engr. Samuel Salifu said there were no controversies over the election, adding that the June 19 meeting was NEC, which would receive reports from the Electoral College. He also said that if possible, the election of the Vice President would take place on that day (June 19).
Besides, for any one of the two candidates to be elected President, that person must secure the votes of 50 per cent of the 308 members.

“If any of the candidates for the election is not present, he can be represented. Nothing stops him from being elected in absentia. The runner-up would become the Vice President.
For now, Akinola would have to settle for the position of the Vice President of CAN, in accordance with its Constitution, having lost by 72 to 33 votes to Onaiyekan.

Sunday Sun learnt that many factors worked against Akinola during the election. Chief among them, his handling of the fate of Christians in the North, particularly during crises.

Lamented a source: “He was not talking. If we now make him President and he now decides to talk, our Moslem brothers would say, “okay, you did not talk when your brother (Obasanjo) was there, why are you saying all these now?
“The man that CAN needs now is somebody who has been consistent; who the world knows speaks out when things are going wrong,” the PFN Chieftain said.
This position pitched the PFN leadership in the North against Akinola. Thus, several delegates from the PFN, OAIC and CSN voted against him.

But opposition against Akinola’s candidacy became stronger with his critics citing his abandonment of the five directorates as his Achilles heel. For instance, they claimed that Akinola rendered deliberation by leaders of the various church groups impossible at each meeting.

For now, CAN is divided along the lines of the five church groups, with three behind the new President.
All said and done, the real test of cohesion in CAN lies in the decisions that the gladiators are likely to take in the days ahead. For instance, having previously been president, would Akinola accept the ratification of the General Assembly on July 6, to now serve as its Vice President under Onaiyekan? Would he throw in the towel?