The Chief Imam of Lagos State University, Professor Sanni Amidu, has strongly criticized the use of public funds to sponsor mass weddings, describing it as a misplaced priority that perpetuates poverty rather than alleviating it.
Speaking with the News Agency of Nigeria on Tuesday, Amidu faulted the decision of some state governments to finance weddings for citizens, arguing that such expenditures represent an irresponsible use of public resources.
His remarks come amid growing debates over government-funded mass weddings in northern Nigeria, particularly in Kano, where the state has historically sponsored large-scale nuptials for underprivileged couples. The initiative, often touted as a social welfare measure, has received both praise and criticism.
Mass weddings, especially those facilitated by state governments, have been a recurring practice in parts of northern Nigeria. The Kano State Government, for example, has sponsored numerous mass wedding programs over the years, citing the need to assist widows, orphans, and those unable to afford the high cost of marriage.
However, critics argue that such initiatives, while addressing immediate social concerns, fail to tackle the root causes of economic hardship. Professor Amidu is among those who believe the funds could be better utilised for long-term solutions.
“Empowerment of the vulnerable to discourage them from vices will be a more impactful way of utilising such funds,” he said. “Assisting people to marry without an enduring means of sustenance after marriage is a half measure and a sure way of maintaining poverty.”
The cleric emphasised that investments in education, skills acquisition, and entrepreneurship would be more beneficial in the long run.
The imam added that returning out-of-school children to classrooms, creating jobs, and training the youth in various trades would have a far greater impact than paying for people’s weddings.”
Amidu further stressed that government officials are entrusted with public funds and must use them judiciously for the collective good.
His comments highlight concerns over financial mismanagement and misplaced priorities in government spending. Critics argue that while mass weddings may provide short-term relief for some couples, they do little to address systemic poverty, unemployment, and educational deficiencies that continue to plague many parts of Nigeria.
Experts have long advocated for alternative strategies to support low-income families and individuals struggling with the financial demands of marriage. Programs such as microfinance schemes, vocational training, and scholarship initiatives could provide sustainable empowerment rather than temporary solutions.
Amidu echoed this sentiment, emphasising the need for policies that promote self-reliance.
His statements align with concerns from economic analysts who argue that government-funded mass weddings do not contribute to real economic growth. Instead, they suggest that investment in industries, trade, and small businesses could create more lasting benefits.
Islamic leaders have often played a key role in advocating for social welfare policies, but opinions on state-sponsored mass weddings remain divided. Some scholars support the initiative, viewing it as a way to reduce immoral behavior and promote stable family structures.
However, others, like Professor Amidu, argue that marriage should be a personal responsibility and that the government should focus on broader social welfare programs.
His stance reflects a broader debate about the intersection of religion, governance, and social responsibility in Nigeria. While cultural and religious traditions often influence government policies, the balance between short-term relief and long-term economic stability remains a contentious issue.
Reactions to Amidu’s statement have been mixed, with some Nigerians supporting his position while others defend the mass wedding programs. Social media discussions on the topic reveal a divide between those who see the initiative as a compassionate effort and those who view it as a waste of resources.
One Twitter user wrote, “The Chief Imam is right! If the government really cares, they should fund education and jobs, not weddings.”
Another countered, “Mass weddings help reduce immorality and give people a chance to start families with dignity. Not everyone can afford to marry otherwise.”
Politically, the debate over mass weddings highlights broader concerns about governance, state priorities, and financial accountability. With elections on the horizon in some states, public expenditure on welfare programs—including mass weddings—could become a campaign issue.
State governments that sponsor mass weddings often justify them as a means of supporting the underprivileged. However, opponents argue that such policies are merely populist gestures aimed at gaining political favor rather than addressing real economic challenges.
