Niger State Governor Mohammed Umar Bago stands firm on a controversial new rule requiring religious leaders to submit their sermon texts to state officials for clearance before delivering them in public. Launched in early September 2025, this policy aims to curb what the governor describes as potentially harmful messages—content that could spark unrest or challenge authority. However, the rule has sharply divided opinion: some support it as a necessary measure to prevent chaos, while others criticize it as an infringement on fundamental freedoms.
Governor Bago insists that the policy is not an attempt to silence religious voices but a strategy to prevent division and disorder. “We cannot say that just because you have the opportunity to be a cleric, you will preach messages that are anti-people, anti-government, and think it’s normal,” he said, drawing comparisons to Saudi Arabia, where sermon vetting is similarly used to maintain social harmony.
The new framework requires preachers, especially those delivering Friday sermons and Sunday homilies, to submit their sermon texts to a screening committee. This committee works alongside the Department of State Services (DSS), the police, the Nigeria Security and Civil Defence Corps (NSCDC), and the military to flag potentially incendiary messages.
This policy is not a novel one for northern Nigeria. After the implementation of Sharia criminal codes in twelve states in the early 2000s, regulatory boards were established in states like Kano, Kaduna, and Borno to license imams and pastors. These boards were tasked with preventing inflammatory speeches and hate messages that could lead to communal violence.
Religious control in the region traces its roots to British colonial rule. During the early 20th century, Christian missionary activities were severely restricted in Muslim-majority areas, and proselytization among Muslims was tightly monitored. This legacy has persisted, with Sharia law continuing to shape religious regulation in northern states since its reintroduction in the 1999 reforms.
Since 1999, when Nigeria returned to civilian rule, twelve northern states, including Zamfara, Kano, and Kaduna, have expanded Sharia to cover criminal law. These courts now handle a variety of cases, ranging from theft and adultery to blasphemy and alcohol consumption. A 2004 report by Human Rights Watch noted that Sharia courts often fall short of international fair trial standards, citing issues such as coerced confessions, limited legal representation, and harsh punishments like amputations. Women, the report emphasized, have been disproportionately affected by these practices.
While Sharia law technically applies only to Muslims, its implementation often extends to non-Muslims, particularly in cases of blasphemy or public preaching, where it has led to increased discrimination. The U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF) warned in 2019 that Sharia law has contributed to the marginalization of non-Muslims in northern states.
Religion and security are deeply intertwined in northern Nigeria, where incidents of violence based on ethnic or religious tensions remain frequent. In 2021, the Armed Conflict Location & Event Data Project (ACLED) recorded a 21% increase in attacks against Christians, a figure that surged by 25% by mid-2022. This violent trend has persisted, fueled by conflicts such as farmer-herder clashes and armed banditry, often carrying religious undertones.
In 2023, ACLED recorded over 2,000 deaths linked to herder-related violence, with Christian farming communities in the Middle Belt suffering the brunt of the attacks, according to International Christian Concern. Furthermore, USCIRF’s 2025 report confirmed that at least four Muslims, including two clerics, remain imprisoned under blasphemy laws, exacerbating religious tensions and undermining freedom of belief.
The legal framework governing religion in Nigeria remains contentious. The country’s 1999 Constitution guarantees citizens the right to freedom of thought, conscience, and religion, as outlined in Section 38. It also protects the right to change one’s faith and practice it openly. Section 10 prevents any government from adopting a state religion, while Section 45 permits restrictions on religious freedoms in the interest of public order, morality, or safety.
This constitutional tension plays out in Nigeria’s courts, where challenges to Sharia-based provisions or state-level religious regulations often hinge on a balance between individual freedoms and public security concerns.
International human rights organizations have raised concerns about Nigeria’s deteriorating religious freedom. The U.S. Department of State’s 2022 International Religious Freedom Report highlighted inflammatory rhetoric from religious leaders as a catalyst for community violence. Similarly, the Religious Freedom Institute criticized the enforcement of these laws, particularly noting their disproportionate impact on Christians, limiting their opportunities in education, employment, and politics in Sharia-governed states.
Open Doors, in its 2025 World Watch List, ranked Nigeria as the sixth hardest place in the world for Christians to live, citing continued violence, forced displacement, abductions, and sexual violence against Christian women and girls in northern Nigeria. These conditions have led to a rise in internally displaced persons (IDPs), further fueling the ongoing humanitarian crisis.
Public reaction to the sermon rule is mixed. Ojeifun Oje Sunday, speaking in an interview with Fairview, expressed support for the policy, arguing that unchecked preaching had caused harm to families and communities. “If there is a body to regulate what they preach before it’s delivered to the society, it will really save a lot,” he said.
On the other hand, Baba Barba acknowledged the government’s intention to regulate sermon content but voiced concerns about the impact on fundamental rights. “It’s an attack on our freedom of speech,” he said, emphasizing that while regulating excesses was necessary, the government should consider alternative methods that don’t infringe upon religious freedom.
Mary, another local resident, supported the policy, arguing that some sermons had negatively impacted homes and marriages. “What the government is trying to do is very good because many homes and marriages have been destroyed due to these issues,” she remarked.
The Christian Association of Nigeria (CAN) in Niger raised concerns, with Secretary Raphael Opawoye warning that the policy could infringe on worship rights, especially as religious leaders had not been consulted.
Reactions on social media platforms, particularly X (formerly Twitter), ranged from outrage to mockery. User @olofpatrick, whose post gained significant traction, denounced the rule as “persecution” that would silence “truth-tellers.” Another user, @Neuton0001, sarcastically remarked, “A government that cannot regulate poverty, insecurity, or unemployment suddenly finds the courage to regulate the pulpit.”
For others, the policy was seen as a distraction from more pressing issues. “@Ado_aliu10” posted, “This is a clear attack on freedom of speech and religion.”
Niger State’s new sermon regulation highlights an enduring dilemma in northern Nigeria: How far should a government go to regulate religious practice in the name of security and peace? While the policy aims to prevent religiously motivated violence, it also raises important questions about individual freedoms, religious autonomy, and government overreach.
