An independent visit to Junior Secondary School, Durumi II has raised serious concerns over the handling of the now-viral incident involving actress Tonto Dikeh, who publicly prayed for and allegedly performed an exorcism-like “deliverance” on a minor during a religious outreach linked to the school environment.

The visit, carried out on Wednesday, March 11, 2026, sought to verify whether the incident occurred within the school premises and to assess the response of school authorities to widespread public concern over the treatment and public exposure of a child.

School Authorities Deny Obvious Evidence

During the visit, the principal of Junior Secondary School, Durumi II denied that the incident took place inside the school compound, claiming instead that it happened outside the premises. This denial stands in sharp contrast to widely circulated photos and video evidence strongly indicating that the event occurred within the school environment.

The principal’s response appeared aimed at distancing the school from responsibility and shielding the institution from blame, rather than addressing the welfare and rights of the minor involved.

Blame Shifted to Parents Instead of Accountability

Rather than condemning the public spiritual exposure of a child, the principal reportedly blamed parents for not raising their children properly, accusing them of neglecting their children’s welfare and failing to provide adequate care and attention.

While parental neglect is a serious societal issue, it cannot be used to justify or excuse the public humiliation, stigmatization, or psychological risk that may arise when a minor is singled out for a recorded religious “deliverance” session.

Philanthropy Is Not a Defense for Violating a Child’s Rights

The principal further defended Tonto Dikeh by stating that she:
prayed for the students,
distributed free Bibles,
and allegedly assisted the family of the child after an accident involving the child and her mother.
These actions, however, do not erase or excuse the central issue.
Philanthropy is not a moral cover for violating the dignity, privacy, and rights of a minor.

Giving gifts, offering prayers, or providing assistance to a family does not justify subjecting a child to an exorcism-like public spectacle or posting such a moment on social media where the child may face stigma, shame, or long-term emotional harm.

Disturbing Witchcraft Claims by School Leadership

One of the most alarming revelations from the visit was the principal’s claim that some of the children are “witches” and that some use food to “initiate” other children.
This statement is deeply disturbing and raises urgent questions about the mindset of individuals entrusted with the care and education of minors.

When school authorities themselves endorse or entertain witchcraft narratives about children:
children become vulnerable to fear, suspicion, and scapegoating,
abusive treatment becomes easier to rationalize,
and educational institutions risk becoming sites of psychological harm rather than protection.
Labeling children as witches is not a cultural triviality. It is a dangerous belief system that has historically contributed to child abuse, social exclusion, trauma, and rights violations.

Systemic Failure Beyond One Viral Video

The principal also criticized both parents and government, stating that the school suffers from inadequate resources and staffing. According to her, in collaboration with the PTA, the school had to employ about eight teachers because government failed to provide enough teaching personnel.
While underfunding and institutional neglect are real and serious problems, they do not justify irrational or harmful responses to children.
Poor funding does not justify superstition.
Lack of staff does not justify public spiritual branding.
Government failure does not justify the normalization of child-targeted exorcism.
This incident reveals a broader societal and institutional crisis in which religious superstition has become so normalized that even educators may fail to recognize obvious violations of child dignity and safeguarding principles.

Call for Immediate Action

In light of these findings, there is an urgent need for:

1. An independent investigation by the FCT Secondary Education Board and relevant child protection agencies,
2. A formal safeguarding review at Junior Secondary School, Durumi II,
3. Mandatory child rights and child protection training for school leaders and staff,
4. A clear prohibition of religious exorcism or deliverance practices involving minors in school settings,
5. And protection, privacy, and psychosocial support for the child involved.

Final Statement

This issue is not about opposing prayer, charity, or personal faith.
It is about one non-negotiable principle:
No amount of philanthropy gives anyone the right to publicly subject a child to a humiliating spiritual spectacle, expose them online, or normalize beliefs that place children at risk of stigma and abuse.
When educators defend such actions and speak of children as witches, the problem is no longer limited to one celebrity or one viral clip.
The problem is in the classroom.

GENESIS ERIRIOMA
Chairman, Critical Thinking Education Initiative
Author, Critical Thinking for Secondary Schools
Advocate of Critical Thinking in Africa

The moment the word God is mentioned, especially in Africa, many people just shut their minds and nod in agreement to whatever they have grown up being indoctrinated with. But if we were to stop at that and ask ourselves, what does this word really mean, and where did it come from?

The English word God does not derive from ancient revelation. It comes from a Germanic root (ǥuđan), probably from a Proto‑Indo‑European root meaning “to invoke” or “to call upon” a deity invoked in ritual, not a specific supreme being. In English and many languages, God became a translation for whatever the dominant religion called its supreme deity.

Click Get Commonsense Understanding of the Bible and learn more about the Origin of God on Selar

Click Image below to Buy on Amazon

In the older Semitic linguistic families of the Middle East, other names were used. The name Yahweh-or, as it was more easily written, the tetragrammaton YHWH-appears in ancient Hebrew texts as the personal name of the deity worshipped by the Israelites. Most scholars think this name comes from roots meaning “to be” or “to exist,” but the exact origin remains debated and is likely local to Israelite religion.

Allah, by contrast, is the Arabic form of “the god,” from al‑ilāh (“the deity”), was in use in pre‑Islamic Arabia in referring to a chief god, before becoming the current standard name for the supreme deity in Islam. Cognates, such as Elah, appear in Aramaic and Hebrew, demonstrating that this was a common Semitic term for a divine being. Because these names originate from different linguistic and cultural backgrounds, it is not a right attitude to consider them merely the same name in different languages or that some sort of title like “Allah” was the universal name of a supreme deity long before these traditions developed. Rather, each of those names reflects the way distinct communities sought to understand and name what they perceived as ultimate reality. True critical thinking invites us to ask not only who we worship but why we use the words we do, and what assumptions lie behind them, rather than simply inheriting them unexamined.

Many students grow up learning what to think rather than how to think. In classrooms, information is often memorized and repeated, but questioning is sometimes discouraged. Critical thinking changes this approach. It teaches students to pause and ask important questions such as: Is this claim true? How do we know? What evidence supports it? Are there other possible explanations?

At the heart of critical thinking are several important skills. One is analysis, which involves breaking down ideas so they can be better understood. Another is evaluation, the ability to judge whether information comes from a reliable source and whether an argument is logical. Critical thinkers also use reasoning to avoid common mistakes such as emotional thinking, blind loyalty to tradition, or believing something simply because “everyone says so.”

Critical thinking does not mean rejecting culture, religion, or authority outright. Rather, it helps individuals understand why they believe what they believe. This is especially important in societies where beliefs are often inherited without question. When people learn to think critically, they gain the confidence to examine ideas respectfully and thoughtfully, without fear.

For secondary school students, critical thinking is an essential life skill. It improves academic performance by helping students understand concepts instead of memorizing answers. It also prepares young people for real-life situations, making informed decisions, recognizing misinformation, solving problems creatively, and engaging with others who may hold different views.

In today’s world of social media, fake news, and persuasive propaganda, critical thinking is more important than ever. A student who can think critically is less likely to be misled and more likely to become an independent learner and responsible citizen.

Ultimately, critical thinking is not about having all the answers. It is about having the courage to question, the discipline to reason, and the honesty to follow evidence wherever it leads.