As debate rages on whether fuel subsidy should be discontinued or not, some clerics call to question the subsidisation of holy pilgrimageby government. They spoke to CHRIS IREKAMBA, CHIJIOKE IREMEKA and CHIGOZIE NWAUBA.'Govt Has No Business Sending People On Pilgrimage'(Dr. Is-haq Akintola, Associate Professor of Islamic Studies, Lagos State University, Ojo, Lagos)GOVERNMENT subsidy on pilgrimage, whether federal or state, is not the same as subsidy on oil. They are poles apart: one is economic, the other religious. The view of the Muslim Rights Concern (MURIC) in the whole thing is that subsidy or no subsidy; there is need for a human face in government's policies. The bottom line has to be 'Will this policy hurt the generality of the people'' 'Will the majority benefit from it'' The focus should be 'the greatest happiness for the greatest number'.Unfortunately, for us in this country, government policies have always been geared towards benefitting an infinitesimally small number of people; Professor Wole Soyinka's 'tiny cabal', not the jamaheer (Arabic for 'poor masses').Look at the infamous Maroko affair where thousands of the jamaheer were forced to abandon their homes under a false and criminal pretext that the place was uninhabitable. That was in the eighties, if I can remember very well. The homes of the poor were pulled down in spite of vehement protests. The same Maroko space was sold out to the rich a few months later. That was enough for a violent revolution in a civilised society.So, what MURIC is saying on oil subsidy is this: the federal government has the facts and figures concerning how much is subsidised. The same federal government has the data on the opportunity cost of the removal of oil subsidy in terms of welfare benefits and dividends of democracy for the citizenry.Let the federal government come out in a transparent manner and I think people will then understand its position. Contrary to the thinking of many Nigerians, governance, particularly in a place, like Nigeria, is a most arduous task. It is like balancing seven plates in your hands and spinning them, making sure that one does not touch the other and that none falls or breaks. Herculean, isn't it' But Nigerians will still appreciate transparency.Coming to the idea of removing subsidy from hajj, MURIC is going to be radical in this regard. Sentiments apart, government has no business sending some people on pilgrimage. The cost implication is too high. Hajj sponsorship is not and should not be a priority for any responsible government. Is it the same malnourished, hungry, naked, homeless, unemployed (and if employed: overworked, underpaid and overtaxed) Muslims that government wants to sponsor on hajj'What, really, is the priority of the average Nigerian Muslim' It is not hajj, definitely. Hajj may be one of the things on his mind. But it is not the priority. The average Nigerian Muslim today is hungry and homeless. He cannot pay his children's school fees. He suffers serious heat because he has no electricity at home. The roads to his abode are inaccessible due to criminal neglect by the powers that be. He suffers from avoidable ailments and curable diseases because there are no drugs in the hospitals around him.Pull that money back into the economy and see how many Christians and Muslims youths will get jobs.See how many students will enjoy scholarship in tertiary institutions. There will be drugs in the hospitals, dispensaries and health centers. The roads will be repaired. Housing will be provided for displaced people.Another painful angle is that hajj sponsorship has been heavily politicised and should be discontinued forthwith.For instance, you will not find any supporter of Action Congress of Nigeria (ACN) among those sponsored by the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and vice versa. When did partisanship become the only criteria for determining eligibility for hajj sponsorship' Neither the governments nor the political parties seek the opinions of Islamic scholars concerning those who are eligible for sponsorship. Hajj is the last of the five pillars of Islam, not the first. It is for those who have the wherewithal, not for every Muniru and Ambali, pardon me, I forgot to mention Dick and Harry.The rule concerning hajj is expressly stated in the Glorious Qur'an 3:97 '' Pilgrimage to the House of Allah is a duty upon those who can afford the journey''Unfortunately, what we find is that even ordinary Muslims ignore this rule. They borrow money to go on hajj. That amounts to bending the rules. It shows there is an urgent need for better understanding even among ordinary Muslims. It is those Muslims who are in government who continue to promote this un-Islamic practice. They need to be better informed. The view here may sound radical but I cannot think of a better way of putting it since it is the truth. I think the time has come to call off this bluff. Enough is enough.However, MURIC is not asking government to completely ignore hajj. No. Government should not totally hands off the issue of hajj. No humane government will do that. Government should continue to be involved, but with limitations. Government should continue to handle the diplomatic angle: facilitating the issuance of passports and visas; maintaining quality control in air transport matter and similar logistics; ensuring security of lives and properties of pilgrims during departure from Nigeria and arrival from the holy land; empowering the Nigerian embassy in Saudi Arabia to perform its statutory role for Nigerians on hajj and Umrah.Anything above these is overzealousness on the part of government. We are aware of allegations that even government uses hajj as a cover for the diversion of public funds. What has government ever said about this' Is government ready to probe hajj operations in the past 10 years' It is another Pandora's box. The present government lacks the political will to do that.'Subsidising Trips On Pilgrimage By Any Govt Is Irresponsible'(Archbishop Magnus Atilade, Chairman, South West Zone of Organisation of African Instituted Churches (OAIC)I DON'T support any form of subsidy on pilgrimage, whether Christian pilgrimage to Jerusalem or Muslim pilgrimage to Mecca. There is no need for subsidy in traveling to any of these holy cites. Anyone that wants to travel should do it himself. Islam encourages people to go to Mecca if you can afford it. We don't even have that provision in Christianity. Anyone that wants to go to Mecca or Jerusalem should foot the bill for himself.To think of subsidising the trip by government is the most irresponsible thing any government would do. What is the government's business with pilgrimage' Pilgrimage is not by compulsion for anybody.This is what some people do and take advantage of it. They collect money from the country for that, yet people don't feel the impact. Since there was a claim that there was government subsidy on pilgrimage, it was never transparent for any reason. The subsidy should be removed with immediate effects both for fuel and that of pilgrimage to Mecca or Jerusalem.The issue of fuel subsidy is one that we have to give clear attention and educate the masses on. This does not apply the way it sounds. The problem is that government indirectly pays those distributing the fuel.The subsidy is not good for the masses. It only favours the rich. The ripple effects do not get down to the masses. If the government removes subsidy, it would use the money for something more important that will better the lives of the masses. With the removal, government will spend on infrastructural development.
Click here to read full news..
