Masussuka’s killing highlights Nigeria’s extremism, terrorism problem - Premium Times Nigeria

Sheikh Yahaya Ibrahim Masussuka, who was shot dead alongside Adamu Abubakar in Dutsin-Ma, Katsina State, on 26 October 2026. Credit: Ogalah Dunamis/PREMIUM TIMES

For some Nigerian Muslim fundamentalists, the killing of Yahaya Masussuka prompted relief rather than grief. The reaction highlights a troubling problem in Nigeria’s religious and security landscape: the growing tendency to rationalise or celebrate violence against people whose religious beliefs differ from those of their critics.

Over the past two decades, many prominent Islamic clerics, including Ja’afar Adam and Auwal Albani, have been assassinated in northern Nigeria. Some of their theological rivals celebrated or justified their deaths, arguing that the clerics had fallen victim to the same brand of extremism they had helped nurture.

Auwal Rafsanjani, the executive director of Civil Society Legislative Advocacy Centre (CISLAC), said the growing confusion between extremism and terrorism is shaping Nigeria’s security discourse.

“Extremist ideologies that promote hatred, justify violence and encourage recruitment into armed groups can create a pathway to terrorism,” he said, noting not all extremists are terrorists.

Mr Masussuka, an Islamic cleric, was shot dead outside his home in Katsina State on the evening of 26 October. His friend, Adamu Abubakar, was also killed in the attack, which the police said was carried out by two assailants on a motorcycle.

Given earlier reports of assassination threats against the cleric, some of his supporters initially suspected supporters of rival Sunni or Izala scholars with whom he had engaged in online disputes. However, there is no evidence linking the groups to the killing. Some Izala scholars have also rejected the allegations, saying they have never been involved in killings or advocated violence since the group’s inception in 1978. 

The narrative shifted when Ansaru, a breakaway faction of Boko Haram, claimed responsibility for the killing. Also known as Jama’atu Ansarul Muslimina Fi Biladis Sudan, the al-Qaeda-linked group, which operates around the Kainji corridors, said it targeted Mr Masussuka because of his rejection of hadiths and advocacy for peaceful coexistence among people of different faiths.

Despite Ansaru claiming responsibility, some of Mr Masussuka’s supporters continue to accuse rival religious scholars of complicity, dismissing Ansaru’s statement as a calculated attempt to divert suspicion from the Izala movement. No established evidence has linked the movement to the killing.

Amnesty International Nigeria condemned the assassination and called for a thorough investigation. President Bola Tinubu also condemned the killing and directed security agencies to investigate the incident.

The terrorists who claimed responsibility for killing Mr Masussuka branded him an “infidel”, a label suggesting he is not a true Muslim.

Under the guise of criticising his controversial religious views, some of Mr Masussuka’s critics continue to gloat over his killing. Their reactions illustrate how doctrinal differences and religious intolerance can create an environment in which violence against dissenting voices is rationalised, celebrated or ignored.

One critic linked Mr Masussuka to the dreadful Maitatsine movement, a claim contradicted by the timeline, given the fact that the slain cleric was about a year old when the uprising occurred. 

Another person posted that the threat posed by people like Mr Masussuka was worse than the insecurity ravaging Nigeria. Similar comments, some challenged and others left unanswered, have deepened divisions within the country’s Muslim community.

The hostility surrounding Mr Masussuka’s teachings did not emerge in isolation; rather, it is woven into the wider history of religious contestation among Muslims in Nigeria and across the globe.

Disagreements over religious interpretation have fuelled tensions and, at times, violent confrontations among Muslim groups in northern Nigeria, including the Tijaniyya, Qadiriyya and Sunni-Salafi or Izala movements.

In Sects & Social Disorder: Muslim Identities and Conflict in Northern Nigeria, a collection edited by the late academic, Abdul Mustapha, scholars examine how competing interpretations of Islam have shaped religious identities, sectarian divisions and conflict in the region.

In the book’s concluding chapter, Mr Mustapha traces the history of violent disagreements between Islamic groups, including the disputes between Sufi and reformist Muslim movements. He argues that doctrinal differences became particularly dangerous when groups began to treat their claims to religious authenticity as mutually exclusive.

The author notes that the language used on both sides of the Izala-Sufi dispute helped incite violence.

The disputes extended beyond theological debates, disrupting daily social life. They restricted access to mosques, curbed the right to preach or practice publicly, and strained relationships within families and communities. In extreme cases, opposing members refused to pray together, exchange greetings, or attend each other’s funerals. 

This friction has extended to higher education in Nigeria, where Muslim student organisations such as the Muslim Students’ Society of Nigeria (MSSN) and Tijanniya Muslim Students’ Association of Nigeria (TIMSAN) share a long history of bitter rivalry.

Mr Mustapha also examines takfirism, the practice of declaring another Muslim an unbeliever, infidel or apostate. Although the practice is not exclusive to jihadi groups, violent Sunni jihadists have weaponised it to justify hostility and attacks against people they consider religiously illegitimate.

He explains that distinctions between mistakes, sin and unbelief have often been blurred in northern Nigeria, allowing accusations of apostasy to be directed at religious opponents and used to justify violence.

This history offers context for the reactions to Mr Masussuka’s killing. It shows how disagreements over religious teachings can escalate from criticism to the denial of another person’s religious legitimacy and, in extreme cases, the justification of violence against them.

“Declaring someone as kafir is dangerous,” Ibrahim Makari, an imam at the National Mosque in Abuja, told PREMIUM TIMES, describing such a declaration as a “gate to assassination.”

The takfirism problem must be stopped, Mr Makari said, calling for the protection of every citizen. He added that regulation of religious speeches, which often spur violence, is long overdue.

Mr Masussuka was known for his “Quran-only” teachings and advocacy for peaceful coexistence among Muslims and Christians. His “rejection of the hadiths” as an authoritative source of Islamic teachings, however, attracted opposition from other religious scholars and groups.

In one of his interviews, Mr Masussuka sought to clarify the many controversies surrounding his persona and teachings, noting that he did not blanketly reject all hadiths. The deceased scholar explained that he only rejected hadiths that tarnish the image of Prophet Muhammad, contradicted Quranic evidence, or promoted and justified terrorism and violence.

In November 2025, the Katsina State Government acknowledged receiving complaints from the cleric that some members of the Izala movement had insulted him and threatened to attack him. The government also received complaints about his teachings and referred the matter to the Katsina Emirate Council.

There is no established evidence linking those earlier complaints or the people accused of threatening him to his killing. Nor is there established evidence implicating the Izala movement in the attack.

Nevertheless, the history of disagreements surrounding his teachings highlights the difficulty of accommodating divergent religious interpretations in an environment where theological differences can become grounds for hostility.

While Mr Masussuka’s killing has once again drawn attention to religious intolerance within Muslim communities, the problem is not exclusive to Islam or northern Nigeria. 

People across the country have faced intimidation, violence and discrimination because of their religious beliefs, including Christians and adherents of traditional African religions.

In May 2022, Deborah Samuel, a Christian student at Shehu Shagari College of Education in Sokoto, was beaten and burnt to death by fellow students after being accused of blasphemy against Islam.

Another Christian, Rhoda Jatau, was arrested and charged with blasphemy after sharing a WhatsApp message condemning Deborah’s killing.

Traditional religious practitioners have also faced hostility. In Kwara State, adherents of traditional religions have reported threats, discrimination and restrictions on their religious activities. 

In Delta State, a Christian prophet and members of his congregation destroyed a traditional shrine and historical artefacts belonging to an Egbesu-worshipping community in December 2024. A Federal High Court subsequently ruled that the harassment of the traditional worshippers was unconstitutional and ordered the church members to rebuild the shrine and pay damages.

Although these incidents differ in their circumstances and severity, they point to a recurring problem which authorities still struggle to curb.

Military authorities and security experts have repeatedly said that response to terrorism cannot be limited to military operations, arrests and the disruption of armed groups.

While the military’s ‘non-kinetic’ counterterrorism approach is mostly limited to peace deals with terrorists, deliberate efforts must be made to address the narratives that allow extremist organisations to portray people with different beliefs as enemies deserving punishment.

“Religious and traditional leaders must play stronger roles in countering extremist narratives, promoting peaceful coexistence and protecting young people against religious manipulation, drug abuse and recruitment into violent organisations,” Mr Rafsanjani said.

“He said the government must distinguish between criminal violence and legitimate religious beliefs, peaceful political expression and lawful dissent,” he added. 

“Fighting terrorism must never become an excuse for religious profiling, persecution or suppression of fundamental freedoms.”