The relationship between the church and the state has always been a very
complex affair. One example suffices of this complex relationship—the
turbulence that marked the charged affairs between Henry VIII and the
Papacy in the 16th century as well as the entire chain of events that
led Henry VIII to break with the Catholic Church and establish the
Church of England.
This was a major historical occurrence
that clearly outlined the kind of conflict the religious could have in
relationship with the state. When, during the Enlightenment in the 18th
century, secularity made its appearance with the seemingly final
separation between the church and the state, it was almost certain that
the tension had been dealt with by a masterstroke of modern sensibility.
Not quite.
The rational architects of the church-state separation
failed to take into consideration all the possible modes of actions and
interactions that will inevitably always instigate conflict wherever the
church dabbles into political issues or whenever the state attempts to
regulate spiritual matters.
It is no longer news that the Financial
Regulatory Council of Nigeria (FRCN), through its executive secretary,
unilaterally implemented a certain clause in the Corporate Governance
Code, especially for Not-For-Profit-Organisations (NFPO), which
necessitated fixing the tenure of the general overseers of religious
organisations in Nigeria. One of the major consequences of that decision
was the resignation of Pastor E. A. Adeboye as the General Overseer of
the Redeemed Christian Church of God (RCCG) in Nigeria. The
justification of the FRCN executive secretary was that he was upholding
the relevant parts of the corporate governance code. If that were the
case, then it would be within the legal purview of the organisation to
do so.
And this has nothing whatsoever to do
with the fact that the executive secretary, now relieved of his duty,
was a former pastor at RCCG. But, as with most things legal, social and
religious in Nigeria, the reality is much more complex than what we are
presented. The outcry that has trailed the FRCN’s move and the reactions
from several quarters, especially on the resignation of Pastor Adeboye,
not only points at a complex situation, but also calls for a cautious
but critical attention to some key issues concerning corporate
governance, religious matters and the democratic functionality of
institutions in Nigeria.
Permit a caveat that should address all
hints of prejudice. This is critical because I am aware of the enormous
anxiety and anger that attend the perceived misadventure of religion in
Nigeria. I am a Christian with strong conviction that the church is one
and will best achieve its earthly mission if it remains one in spite of
inescapable denominational imperative. Consequently, whereas I am a
Baptist by birth and orientation, I was largely groomed into spiritual
maturity by the RCCG as a full-fledged member. I, indeed like millions
of others, holds Pastor E. A. Adeboye in the highest esteem for the
tremendous grace upon his ministry of which I am direct beneficiary in a
classical sense and for the achievements that the RCCG has garnered
since he became the general overseer many years ago. RCCG’s greatness as
an organisation has many dimensions.
Apart from its centrality as a leading
religious organisation, RCCG has also in several ways insinuated itself
into the development and social challenges that confronts Nigerians. We
can see the church as a development partner with several Nigerian
governments over the years. And this comes also in terms of the general
overseer serving as religious adviser in one form or the other. An
empirical statistics will reveal the immense impacts that the RCCG, and
any other well-meaning religious organisation, has had in the lives of
Nigerians.
But the issues at stake in this matter
transcend my RCCG connection. It’s especially critical given the extent
to which the legion of charlatans in the cloak of Levitical priesthood
have infiltrated Christendom with diabolic and commercial mission and
are daily denigrating the faith because they are provided umbrage by the
absence of corporate governance codes and their enforcement. These are
issues of democratic surveillance, organisational integrity,
institutional capacity and reform.
In this regard, the FRCN constitutes a
significant dimension of the ensemble of democratic institutions in
Nigeria. And this is more so with regard to the monitoring of corporate
governance matters. On its website, the FRCN outlines its mission as
simply as possible: “To bring utmost confidence to investors, reputation
to oversight and ensure quality in accounting, auditing, actuarial,
valuation and corporate governance standards and non-financial reporting
issues.” This is seriously commendable because corporate governance is a
very significant aspect of democratic governance in Nigeria.
Ensuring good corporate governance
practices is a sine qua non for laying the foundation of an
accountability principle in the national economy that will eventually
devolve on the well-being of Nigerians. The Not-For-Profit-Organisations
(NFPO) are equally part of this corporate governance accountability
concern because they equally impact on the financial profile of the
nation and of individuals and organisations.
If all these are correct, what then went
wrong? There are two immediate wrong steps I see. First, understandably
Daddy G.O. is above reproach in that he would prefer to give to Caesar
and to God what belongs to God as a man who understands the covenant
essence of Exodus 14v14, it was precipitate for the RCCG and Pastor
Adeboye to capitulate to the NFPO Code of Corporate Governance without
at least exploring the option of challenging its stipulations for
rightness, legality and legitimacy.
Of course, religious organisations
should be at the forefront as one of the most law-abiding entities
anywhere, but that should not encroach on RCCG’s constitutional duty to
challenge any legislation that encroaches on their fundamental rights,
or has any whiff of irregularity or obscurity. While wishing Pastor
Joseph Obayemi, the new general overseer for Nigeria, well in this new
and most serious spiritual endeavour, it seems that the RCCG jumped the
gun and capitulated without exploring available avenues, including the
courts, that would have allowed a rethinking of the said legislation.
The second issue is even more perplexing, and this is how porous our
institutional dynamics have become to the extent that individuals are
allowed to initiate impetuous actions that throw the society into
tension.
Let us assume, just hypothetically, that
the former executive secretary of FRCN has some kind of hidden ax to
grind with the RCCG, it should not have been possible for him to use the
institution he supervised as the instrument for personal vendetta. No
institution should ever be so permissible of anything personal. And this
possibility, as I see it, constitutes the core of the institutional
deficit afflicting Nigeria. Institutions in Nigeria demonstrate a
glaring incapacity to be proactive in the face of challenges,
governance, political, economic, and administrative. They also lack the
mechanism to prevent internal incongruities.
First thing first, every institution
must react to its context and environment. With regard to the idea of
corporate governance, the FRCN ought to have known that it was walking a
very tight rope in its attempt to monitor a corporate atmosphere
charged with complex practices. Religion is a crucial issue in Nigeria.
And its mismanagement has led to critical losses for the Nigerian state.
The Boko Haram insurgency that has cost
many lives could be traced, in a significant sense, to some badly
managed military and administrative policies. Stakeholders’ ownership is
very critical in policy implementation success, and that translates
into a due and meticulous diligence in ensuring that each policy issue
makes the round of relevant stakeholders. The implication of this is
simple: any policy arising from corporate governance issue ought to have
gone through the entire stretch of policy assessment and even more. Of
course, no policy is impeccable.
But then the ripples and revelations
trailing the corporate governance code, especially for NFPO, seem to
demonstrate a sloppiness bordering on lack of professionalism and
institutional hastiness. Suspending a policy in itself speaks volume
about the appropriateness of such a policy for its intended purpose.
Thus, as a commentator rightly notes, not properly deducing the
intricate nature of this issue of applying corporate governance code to,
say, churches amount to an overkill, an institutional excessiveness
that poses the danger of heating up the society unnecessarily.
But then, there is another side to the
issue. And this involves the churches and other religious organisations
themselves. While the FRCN is undergoing reconstitution, and the
corporate governance code, hopefully, will be re-evaluated and reviewed,
there is also a need for churches to look inward in the face of weak
gate keeping that is undermining the Christian brand as the salt and the
light of the world through the activities of charlatans in the guise of
prophets-entrepreneurs riding on prosperity theology popular tendencies
and vulnerabilities of a poverty-ridden and superstitious society and
pervasive miracle mentality.
The Federal Government has the right to
instigate any policy that affects its citizens, and religion plays a
huge role in this regard because whatever happens in the religious
realms have extensive impact on the way people relate with themselves in
the public spaces. Beyond this, the FRCN is right about the critical
nature of corporate governance and why not even churches and mosques can
be excused.
Religious organisations owe the
government an adequate compliance with regulations that probes
accountability. This is even more so in a state that is attempting to
increase its profile of democratic governance. A church or mosque may be
theocratic but that does not preclude its legal response to certain
democratic imperatives concerning structures and rules.
On the other hand, the religious
organisations owe their members a firm adherence to strict codes of
accountability and other institutional structures that ensure not only
spiritual adequacy but also financial openness. It would not be a sin if
the financial transactions of a religious organisation are open within
the bounds of regulation and best practices. Since the church or mosque
is a custodian of morality, this institutional reform of its structures
should not a big deal. Fortunately, the RCCG is not a mean church that
would be caught unaware by such institutional inadequacies.
But this is not to say that the RCCG is a
perfect church. I am a member, and I should know that neither the RCCG
nor any other church for that matter is immune from certain internal
shortcomings that should necessitate a continual rehabilitation of its
structures and institutions. Religious organisations are agents of
development, especially within the environment of institutional
incapacitation in Nigeria. From the Catholic Church to the RCCG and even
several Islamic organisations, religious organisations play a dominant
role in bringing the dividends of democracy to the doorsteps of members
and other people alike.
And development in this context of
underdevelopment becomes a moral imperative which would not permit the
organisations to champion a good cause while they are in themselves an
emblem of institutional incoherence. A strong case can be made for the
autonomy of religious organisations given that, for instance, some of
their founding constitution sits incongruously with the legal
requirements of the federal constitution of Nigeria. However, just as
religious institutions have modified the way we think and rethink
secularity in Nigeria, they must equally be modified by the imperatives
of secularity and democracy. It will therefore be an act of good faith
for religious organisations to firm up their institutional deficits in
ways that will add to their credibility, spiritually and
administratively. In many quarters, churches and mosques do not enjoy
good public reputation. In fact, the reason why many lash out at them is
the attempt to hide corruption behind the cloak of godliness to deceive
the innocent.
On the other side, and this is even more
critical, it is high time Nigeria (and religious leaders would do
posterity great service if they provide a lead in this rethinking and
reform) commenced a deep institutional and administrative reassessment
of religion and its corporate dynamics in a manner that will put to rest
the debate around whether religious organisations ought to answer to
corporate regulations. The review of the corporate governance code that
jumpstarted the problem in the first place could be a wonderful
opportunity to resolve it finally.
BY Tunji Olaopa
No comments:
Post a Comment