The warning by the Sultan of Sokoto against alleged stereotyping of Muslims as criminals should not be taken lightly, as the issue of stereotyping can escalate insecurity if not properly handled. This is more so for a country held together by fragile cohesion. No society should expect lasting peace if its components apportion guilt to entire ethnic or religious communities. There is no religion called criminality. However, across all faiths, individual perpetrators have always found themselves on the wrong side of the law.

The Sultan urged Nigerians to refrain from actions or narratives that seek to portray Islam and Muslims negatively, noting that such efforts lack evidence in the Qur’an, the Hadith, or Nigeria’s diverse cultural traditions.

The Sultan’s warning is notable. His intervention should kick-start a national campaign in which religious leaders, with equal resolve, denounce the criminal acts of those who falsely invoke God’s name.

In moments of grief and insecurity, the temptation to resort to labelling becomes strong. However, it is unjustifiable. Fear and suspicion should never be allowed to replace reason or breed prejudice. Besides undermining the constitutional guarantee of equality before the law, such stereotyping punishes the innocent alongside the guilty and exacerbates social fault lines. Section 42 of the Constitution expressly prohibits discrimination based on religion, ethnicity and place of origin. Therefore, millions of Nigerian Muslims should not be tagged as criminals for the wrongs of a few adherents. The same principle, in fairness, applies to Christians and adherents of all other faiths.

On this ground, sweeping statements that forcibly enrobe any religion with the garb of criminality are condemnable. They risk distorting reality and weakening the fight against insecurity. No religion has ever been docked in any Nigerian court. Individuals have. That is because, regardless of whether they pray in mosques or churches, or the ethnic communities they come from, kidnappers and terrorists are tried based on evidence, not prejudice.

Against this backdrop, the call by the Nigerian Supreme Council for Islamic Affairs to curb inflammatory narratives is justified. Public figures who command large audiences must choose their words with great caution, especially in a society that is already polarised. Rather than improve security, religious profiling makes communities less willing to cooperate with security agencies. Having had their trust fractured, they retreat into resentment. This, in turn, jeopardises policing and intelligence gathering.

Meanwhile, extremists wait in the shadows, ready to exploit such alienation for recruitment and propaganda.

That said, it is not enough to reject religious stereotyping. The conversation must go further, accompanied by the unwavering denunciation of crimes committed by individuals who appropriate religion to gain legitimacy. This is where greater emphasis must be placed on moral leadership. Nigeria has borne the brunt of Boko Haram and the Islamic State West Africa Province, whose members routinely invoke Allah while committing acts that violate every moral principle their faith professes. Muslims and Christians have been slaughtered. Mosques and churches have been razed. Entire communities have been devastated and displaced. Invoking Islam does not make their crimes Islamic any more than quoting the Holy Scriptures makes murder an act of Christian worship.

This distinction must not be overlooked. Terrorism does not represent Islam. Equally, extremist groups deliberately manipulate Islamic vocabulary and symbols to recruit followers and cloak their crimes with false legitimacy. To deny either reality is to be economical with the truth, a posture that can only perpetuate prejudice and weaken the nation’s resolve to tackle ideological radicalisation.

The Sultan occupies a very important position, one that empowers him to expose the theological bankruptcy of extremists and reassure vulnerable communities that violence committed in the name of Allah betrays the Islamic faith. Voices like his must resonate not only when Muslims face unfair profiling but also whenever bandits and other criminals desecrate Islam. Christian leaders share a similar obligation, as indeed do all religious authorities. The credibility of faith communities is strengthened not by defending sectional interests but by taking an uncompromising stand for universal principles.

The United Nations Development Programme’s study, Journey to Extremism in Africa, found that violent extremism is closely linked to the absence of good governance, as well as factors such as economic hardship and social exclusion. The report also emphasises the importance of trusted local voices, including religious leaders, in strengthening societies against radicalisation and promoting peaceful coexistence. It notes that while military responses remain necessary, extremist ideologies cannot be defeated without effective community engagement and moral leadership.

For Nigeria, this finding has important implications. Security agencies may dismantle terrorist camps.

However, the narratives that persuade vulnerable young people to embrace violence can only be countered within local communities. The first line of defence against radicalisation remains imams, pastors, traditional rulers, teachers and parents. These are the people who shape values long before security agencies encounter recruits. Religious institutions should, therefore, devote greater effort to promoting interfaith dialogue. Sermons should expose those who manipulate religious texts for unscrupulous purposes. Religious bodies must also emphasise respect for human life and obedience to civic responsibilities.

The media must shun sensationalism capable of reinforcing harmful stereotypes. Reporting should draw a clear distinction between criminals and the communities from which they emerge. The burden of professional responsibility requires journalists to be precise in their use of language. Political leaders should also avoid fuelling religious or ethnic anxieties through inflammatory speeches. Long after such rhetoric may have yielded temporary political gains, national cohesion may never recover from the damage inflicted.

Nigeria’s insecurity has already taken a huge toll on its citizens. Communities have been destroyed, along with public confidence. The country does not need another layer of division fuelled by mutual suspicion among religious groups. Terrorists, bandits and kidnappers thrive when societies lose trust in one another. Fractured communities become easier to manipulate and harder to protect. The Sultan’s warning should therefore be understood as both a caution and an invitation. Nigerians must guard against the dangerous habit of judging entire communities by the crimes of a few. At the same time, religious leaders must intensify their collective moral campaign against the exploitation of religion for criminal ends.

Nigeria’s future depends on embracing these dual truths with equal conviction. Citizens must reject every attempt to stereotype Muslims, Christians or any other community as inherently criminal because justice is individual, not collective. At the same time, religious leaders must relentlessly expose and condemn those who abuse the name of God to perpetrate evil. The law should pursue every offender without fear or favour, while society protects every innocent citizen from prejudice and discrimination.

That is the balance a mature democracy must strive to uphold. Nigeria will become safer not when its citizens suspect one another, but when they stand united against individuals whose crimes offend both the law of the land and the God they falsely claim to serve.