One has been reading so much unfavorable reviews on the National Hajj Commission of Nigeria, (NAHCON) with deep concern. Some publications went so far to delve into internal issues while one was an alleged unanimous vote of no confidence on the leadership of the National Hajj Commission of Nigeria (NAHCON). Truly, people like me acknowledge that no human institution is perfect, therefore it is important to raise some pertinent questions.
First, why only now are these complaints surfacing? It is curious that three months after the conclusion of the 2025 Hajj—echoed loudly even by some members of the National Assembly as one of the most successful pilgrimages in recent history—we are suddenly inundated with a chorus of alleged failures. How come that throughout the Hajj exercise itself, there was no record of large-scale pilgrims’ complaints? Why are pilgrims themselves, the very people NAHCON was created to serve, not the ones driving these narratives of alleged failure?
Second, one cannot ignore the selective nature of the calls for removal. Why is it that the campaigners are seeking the removal of the Chairman and two Commissioners, but not the the whole board? Could there be a clandestine reason behind this, perhaps a desire to pave the way for some preferred person from the Commission to assume the chairmanship? If not, why the unusual exclusion?
For context, NAHCON’s Board is composed of the Chairman/CEO, three full-time Commissioners, and representatives from key national sister agencies, Islamic bodies (NSCIA, JNI, etc.). The Board was designed to function as a collective decision-making organ, with checks and balances. Yet, what we now read are about factions within, rancorous voices seeking to undermine not just an individual, but the stability of an organization itself. Still yet, this is the institution whose integrity these members were appointed to protect. We read of Members raving over day-to-day PROCUREMENT matters. We read of alleged postings being nepotistic. We read of alleged series of corruption scandals attached to the Chairman’s name. Whether true or false, this is dangerous for Hajj administration in Nigeria. NAHCON is not about an individual, it is a revered institution whose name should not be dragged carelessly.
I also recall that this is not the first time such political undertones have trailed Hajj management in Nigeria. Since the establishment of NAHCON in 2006, successive Boards have had their share of tussles, with certain stakeholders attempting to bend the Commission to their interests—whether over airline allocations, catering contracts, or accommodation arrangements. What makes the current situation different is the scale of the accusations and the timing, coming after a widely acclaimed operation.
In complaints bygone with a tone that suggests scandalization rather than repair, I read of service providers waiting for payment. While concerns about outstanding payments to some service providers and reconciliation of accounts are legitimate issues that NAHCON itself has already admitted are being addressed, to magnify them into a narrative of “total failure” is grossly misleading. The reality is that Hajj 2025 was conducted smoothly, Nigerian pilgrims performed their rites without disruption, and no Nigerian pilgrim was left stranded in Saudi Arabia. These facts cannot be erased by retrospective rebranding of success as failure.
Furthermore, EFCC investigations are routine in any transparent democracy and should not be misrepresented as proof of guilt. Even federal ministries, governors, and agencies are routinely investigated without being declared failures. To weaponize ongoing investigations as political ammunition is to undermine due process.
My observation as a concerned Nigerian Muslim is that the recent campaign of calumny appears less about service to pilgrims and more about power play within and around the Commission. The rhetoric of “failure” collapses under scrutiny, given that pilgrims returned without manifest complaints, Nigeria met Saudi deadlines, and stakeholders initially acknowledged NAHCON’s coordination. I believe NAHCON should be commended for making Nigerians participate in this year’s Hajj. We are made to understand that the NAHCON solely paid for Mashair camp booking ahead of deadline from its own purse because the some States’ Pilgrims Welfare Boards did nor remit pilgrims hajj fare at the time. Had the Hajj Commission not taken this suicidal step, no Nigerian pilgrim would have participated in the pilgrimage. Yes suicidal because the Commission did not have a definite number to book camps for. This we had read in the news, and to that were no refutations.
The Nigerian Muslim community deserves better than to have its religious worship in the Hajj politicized. There is prosperity in collective deposits of Hajj fares, but simply because some persons sniff money making fumets in the pilgrimage, this sacred solemn exercise should not be desecrated with political or any other pursuits. If there are genuine grievances, they should be channeled through constructive engagement, not through orchestrated smear campaigns. History will judge harshly those who attempt to destabilize an institution as critical and soul touching as NAHCON for selfish ends.
In conclusion, Nigerians must ask: is this about pilgrims’ welfare, or is it about ambition and vested interests? The timing, the selectivity, and the contradictions in the accusations speak volumes.
Shamsu is a concerned Muslim writing from 59D Market Road (Emir’s Palace Road) Gusau, Zamfara State