Kano Adviser Urges Tinubu to Convene Council of State Over US ‘Christian Genocide’ Allegations in Open Letter

By Tgnews Reporter

Barrister Aminu Hussaini, Special Adviser to Kano State Governor Abba Kabir Yusuf on Justice and Constitutional Matters, has issued a compelling open letter dated November 7, 2025, directly appealing to President Bola Ahmed Tinubu to urgently summon an emergency session of the Council of State.

The call is driven by the deepening diplomatic crisis triggered by the United States designating Nigeria as a Country of Particular Concern under its International Religious Freedom Act, amid accusations of widespread religious persecution and what some American officials and advocates have labeled a Christian genocide in northern and central regions of the country.

Hussaini, a dedicated legal practitioner and public servant committed to Nigeria’s unity and sovereignty, framed the U.S. actions as a profound threat to national independence, pointing to accompanying statements from U.S. lawmakers and religious figures that have raised the specter of economic sanctions and, in more alarming tones, potential military intervention if the situation is not addressed.

He characterized the genocide claims as potentially stemming from misinformation, incomplete information, or a distorted portrayal of Nigeria’s intricate security challenges, which include banditry, farmer-herder conflicts, and persistent Islamist insurgencies such as those perpetrated by Boko Haram.

Yet, he cautioned that failing to respond decisively could inflame internal religious divisions, undermine investor confidence, erode Nigeria’s global reputation, and complicate relations with vital international partners, including the United States, the United Nations, the Economic Community of West African States, and the African Union.

Drawing on Section 153 of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria as amended, Hussaini asserted that the Council of State, an advisory body that brings together former heads of state, all serving governors, the Chief Justice of Nigeria, and other constitutional stakeholders, is ideally suited to guide the president through this national emergency.

He argued that assembling this diverse group would powerfully demonstrate solidarity across regional, religious, and political lines, reinforcing Nigeria’s resolve to uphold its territorial integrity and constitutional framework against external pressures.

The council could orchestrate a robust diplomatic and legal rebuttal by gathering and presenting verifiable evidence on the state of religious freedom, human rights protections, and ongoing counterterrorism initiatives, thereby enabling structured dialogues with Washington and multilateral organizations.

Beyond countering the international narrative, Hussaini stressed the opportunity for an internal reckoning, where the council would scrutinize the latest intelligence from military, police, and security agencies to identify patterns of violence and devise comprehensive strategies to shield civilians of all faiths from further harm.

He warned that the genocide rhetoric risks stoking sectarian strife within Nigeria, making a council-directed, transparent communication plan essential to dispel rumors, correct falsehoods, and neutralize attempts by divisive actors to exploit religious sensitivities for gain.

From a legal standpoint, Hussaini underscored that any suggestion of foreign military action without Nigeria’s explicit consent breaches the United Nations Charter and core principles of international law, necessitating council deliberations on defensive legal, diplomatic, and political measures to forestall sanctions that might disrupt development assistance, trade agreements, and security collaborations.

Hussaini portrayed the convening of the council as an emblem of confident, proactive governance that would reassure both Nigerian citizens and the global community of the administration’s alertness and unity in safeguarding sovereignty.

He cast the decision as a pivotal moment of strategic statesmanship, one that would bolster President Tinubu’s legacy as a unifier during turbulent times, echoing Nigeria’s historical resilience in overcoming civil war, insurgencies, and foreign pressures through inclusive leadership.

The letter, disseminated through public channels reveals the constraints of Hussaini’s role, as he noted his limited direct access to the Presidency compelled this open approach, rooted not in protocol defiance but in urgent patriotic obligation.

Nigeria’s longstanding battles with religious and ethnic violence, stretching from the Biafran conflict of the 1960s to the current crises in the northeast and Middle Belt, provide the backdrop for this renewed scrutiny of the Tinubu government, which has focused on economic stabilization while grappling with persistent insecurity.

Human rights organizations contend that authorities often downplay the religious dimensions of these conflicts, whereas government allies highlight initiatives such as bolstered troop deployments and interfaith reconciliation efforts.

Hussaini closed on a note of enduring optimism, affirming that Nigeria has repeatedly surmounted adversities through prudent, collective, and prompt action, and that rallying the nation’s leaders past and present would enable a singular voice for justice, peace, and cohesion.

The open letter has already galvanized widespread discourse on Nigeria’s approach to intertwining issues of faith, security, and international relations, leaving observers to monitor whether President Tinubu will embrace this counsel in the days ahead.