Nigeria’s political consciousness was jolted this Easter season as fiery cleric and former presidential aspirant, Pastor Tunde Bakare, launched a blistering critique of President Bola Tinubu’s government and the 10th National Assembly—accusing both of turning Nigeria’s democratic institutions into instruments of executive control and political banditry.
In a sermon titled “Captured by Compromise”, Bakare claimed that Nigeria is “in captivity,” alleging that the National Assembly has degenerated into a “rubber stamp” with no will of its own. “The Tenth Assembly,” he declared, “is the most spineless in our democratic history. It is no longer a check on power—it is the President’s 48th minister.”
With rhetorical fire and historical references, Bakare drew comparisons between the present Assembly and its more assertive predecessors—those that resisted Obasanjo’s Third Term bid, invoked the Doctrine of Necessity, and defied executive interference in leadership choices.
“Today’s lawmakers,” he thundered, “have traded courage for comfort and oversight for obedience.”
In a pointed rebuttal delivered by Senator Yemi Adaramodu, spokesman for the Senate, the upper chamber accused Bakare of weaponizing the pulpit for political ambition and of undermining public confidence in democratic institutions.
“Criticism is a democratic right,” said Adaramodu. “But when it is dressed in contempt, laced with ambition, and aimed at destabilizing public trust, it must be challenged.”
Describing Bakare’s sermon as a “biased, political ecumenical homily,” the Senate pointed to his dual identity as a cleric and seasoned political actor—including his past bids for the presidency and vice presidency—as context for interpreting his remarks.
The Senate defended its record, noting that no unconstitutional proposal has come before the 10th Assembly and that disagreements with the Executive have occurred when necessary, even on sensitive matters such as the Rivers State emergency.
While affirming respect for Bakare’s standing as a spiritual leader, the Senate emphasized that democracy demands responsibility from all public figures—clerical or political.
“We are open to engagement—even with Pastor Bakare—but let it be constructive,” Adaramodu said. “This is not the time for crusades of contempt but conversations rooted in truth.”
The statement accused Bakare of historical revisionism, reminding Nigerians that the same Assembly sessions he now praises were once the targets of his earlier criticisms. “If he was patient then, he should be patient now,” the Senate noted, hinting at possible political motivations behind the timing and tone of the sermon.
For many Nigerians, this war of words has become more than just a public spat—it is a reflection of a deeper struggle over truth, leadership, and the role of public conscience in a nation battling economic woes, insecurity, and institutional fatigue.
While some hail Bakare’s critique as a wake-up call long overdue, others applaud the Senate for defending the dignity of democratic processes against what they see as inflammatory populism.
But amidst the rising tension between sacred authority and state power, one question lingers in the hearts of many: Can truth speak without becoming political—and can power be checked without silencing conscience?