A proposed bill seeking to criminalise preaching in commercial buses has triggered widespread opposition from Christian leaders across Nigeria. SEYI SOKOYA examines their reactions, the arguments for and against the legislation, and the broader constitutional debate over balancing road safety with the rights to freedom of religion and expression.

FOR decades, commercial buses in Nigeria have served as more than just a means of transportation. They have acted as marketplaces, debating arenas, campaign platforms, and, for countless Christian evangelists, moving pulpits.

From Lagos’ yellow buses to the minibuses crisscrossing Ibadan, Abuja, Kano, and Port Harcourt, passengers have grown accustomed to hearing spontaneous sermons, calls to repentance, prayers, words of encouragement, and hymns before they reach their destinations.

However, this long-standing tradition now faces its biggest legal challenge. The controversy began after the Senate passed the Federal Road Safety Corps (FRSC) Act (Amendment) Bill, 2026, which proposes a fine of ₦50,000, six months’ imprisonment, or both, for anyone found guilty of hawking, trading, or preaching in commercial buses.

Lawmakers argue that this measure aims to reduce distractions that could endanger motorists and passengers. The bill is currently awaiting presidential assent.

Instead of resolving the issue, the proposal has sparked one of the most spirited national conversations in recent years, pitting road safety concerns against constitutional guarantees of freedom of religion and expression.

A growing wave of Christian opposition

Within days of the Senate’s decision, Christian organisations and church leaders across denominational lines began issuing statements rejecting the proposal. They described it as unnecessary, unconstitutional, and a distraction from more pressing national issues.

The Christian Council of Nigeria (CCN) stated that the provision contradicts constitutional guarantees of freedom of religion and expression, arguing that placing peaceful preaching in the same category as hawking and trading diminishes an activity protected by Nigeria’s Constitution. The council questioned whether criminalising evangelism truly addresses the country’s more urgent socio-economic and security challenges.

The Organisation of African Instituted Churches (OAIC), Nigeria Region, also criticised the bill. Its president, Dr. Israel Akinadewo, argued that equating Gospel preaching with commercial hawking sends a troubling message and undermines constitutionally protected religious expression. The organisation appealed to President Bola Tinubu to withhold assent to the legislation.

The Anglican Communion added its voice to the growing opposition. The Anglican Bishop of Lagos South West, the Right Reverend Ebenezer Adewole, described the proposed legislation as an undue distraction from the core responsibilities of governance and a waste of legislative time.

During a media briefing at the Cathedral Church of Pentecost in Festac, Lagos, ahead of the inaugural Synod of the Diocese of Lagos South West, Bishop Adewole urged lawmakers to focus their efforts on addressing issues such as insecurity, economic hardship, and other matters directly affecting Nigerians, rather than pursuing legislation aimed at criminalising public preaching in commercial vehicles.

His intervention further reinforced the belief among Christian leaders that the proposed amendment represents a misplaced priority in legislative focus.

Women Christian leaders join the opposition

Resistance to the proposed legislation has expanded beyond church councils and bishops. The Women Wing of the Christian Association of Nigeria (WOWICAN) has directly appealed to President Bola Tinubu to reject the legislation, emphasising that road safety goals should not infringe on fundamental human rights.

Dr Ayobami Akinadewo, the National Chairperson of WOWICAN, has called for broader consultations that include religious organisations, legal experts, and civil society before implementing any restrictions. The group argues that peaceful religious expression should never be criminalised simply because it occurs in a commercial vehicle.

Northern Christian leaders reject road safety argument

The strongest responses have come from Northern Nigeria. The Northern States Christian Elders Forum (NOSCEF) has warned that criminalising peaceful preaching would be a dangerous infringement on the constitutional freedoms of religion and expression. They cautioned that such legislation could create unnecessary religious tension in an already sensitive environment and urged President Bola Tinubu not to approve the bill.

Similarly, Reverend Joseph Hayab, Chairman of the Northern Christian Association (NCA), dismissed the claim that preaching or playing religious messages in commercial buses poses a threat to road safety. He argued that activities such as preaching, playing music, offering prayers, and sharing words of encouragement inside vehicles do not interfere with road safety or vehicle movement.

Hayab noted that if the proposal indeed originated from road safety authorities, it suggests a misunderstanding of road regulations. He pointed out that modern vehicles are equipped with radios and audio systems meant for providing information, education, encouragement, and entertainment as long as they don’t distract drivers.

While he acknowledged that some individuals may behave inappropriately while preaching in buses, Hayab maintained that many ministers use these opportunities to pray for travellers, encourage passengers, and remind drivers about safe journeys.

Describing the bill as a misplaced legislative priority, he warned that criminalising bus evangelism would infringe on Nigerians’ constitutional rights to freedom of religion and expression. Instead of debating restrictions on public preaching, he urged lawmakers to focus on addressing the pressing issues of insecurity, poverty, hunger, and other urgent national challenges.

“I ask myself whether our National Assembly truly understands what it means to be lawmakers,” he expressed. “At a time like this in Nigeria, they are concerned about creating a law to prevent people from preaching in vehicles.”

Hayab urged lawmakers to distinguish between isolated misconduct and legitimate religious expression, rather than impose blanket restrictions on all forms of preaching in commercial vehicles. He also called on Christian leaders nationwide to engage with members of the National Assembly and advocate for the withdrawal of the bill.

Directly appealing to President Bola Tinubu, he urged the President not to support any legislation that would limit citizens’ constitutional rights. He insisted that Nigerians have the right to freely practice, express, and propagate their faith, provided it is done peacefully and responsibly.

CAN calls for dialogue

The Christian Association of Nigeria (CAN) also rejected the proposal, maintaining that while passenger comfort and public order are legitimate concerns, restrictions affecting religious activities must be carefully balanced against constitutional rights.

Rather than criminalising preaching, CAN advocated dialogue involving lawmakers, religious leaders, transport unions and civil society organisations to arrive at a solution that protects both road safety and constitutional freedoms.

A lone Christian voice supports the bill

Interestingly, not every cleric opposed the proposal. Pastor Remmy Hazzan, a Provincial Assistant Pastor of the Redeemed Christian Church of God (RCCG), publicly supported the legislation. He argued that preaching inside moving vehicles can distract drivers and endanger passengers.

Pastor Hazzan emphasised that Christians are biblically instructed to obey lawful authorities and suggested that churches should educate their members on how to comply with any new laws if they are enacted.

He noted that the exact scope of the legislation would become clearer after its implementation. His stance is one of the few publicly supportive Christian voices amid widespread opposition.

More than a road safety debate

Legal and religious observers believe the controversy ultimately revolves around balancing two legitimate public interests. On one hand, the government has a responsibility to protect lives by minimising distractions on Nigerian roads. On the other, there is a constitutional guarantee that every Nigerian has the right to freely practice, profess, and propagate their religion.

Most Christian leaders argue that if distraction is genuinely the concern, enforcement should focus on behaviours that demonstrably compromise driver concentration, rather than singling out peaceful religious expression.

However, supporters of the amendment contend that any activity capable of diverting a driver’s attention—whether hawking, trading, or preaching—should be regulated equally in the interest of public safety.

As President Bola Tinubu deliberates whether to sign or withhold assent to the amendment, the debate has evolved beyond commercial buses. It has sparked a significant national conversation about where public safety ends and religious liberty begins.