|
Get AfricaFocus Bulletin by e-mail!
Print this page
|
Note: This document is from the archive of the Africa Policy E-Journal, published
by the Africa Policy Information Center (APIC) from 1995 to 2001 and by Africa Action
from 2001 to 2003. APIC was merged into Africa Action in 2001. Please note that many outdated links in this archived
document may not work.
|
Nigeria: Sharia Update / Background
Nigeria: Sharia Update / Background
Date distributed (ymd): 020402
Document reposted by Africa Action
Africa Policy Electronic Distribution List: an information
service provided by AFRICA ACTION (incorporating the Africa
Policy Information Center, The Africa Fund, and the American
Committee on Africa). Find more information for action for
Africa at http://www.africaaction.org
+++++++++++++++++++++Document Profile+++++++++++++++++++++
Region: West Africa
Issue Areas: +political/rights+ +gender/women+
SUMMARY CONTENTS:
This posting contains several documents related to the issue of the
extension of Sharia law in northern Nigeria,and in particular the
recently commuted case of Safiya Hussaini, who was condemned to
death by stoning for adultery. According to news accounts, another
woman, Amina Lawal Kurami, was condemned to the same penalty by
another court only days before the commutation of Safiya Hussaini's
sentence.
For additional updates, see
http://allafrica.com/nigeria
Also in relation to Nigeria, Human Rights Watch has released a new
report condemning the failure of the Nigerian government to
invesigate and punish the massacre of civilians by troops in Benue
province last year:
http://www.hrw.org/press/2002/04/nigeria040102.htm
See also:
http://www.africafocus.org/docs01/nig0110.php>
For additional statements by Human Rights Watch on Sharia in
Nigeria, see
http://www.hrw.org/africa/nigeria.php
For a different view of Sharia from northern Nigeria, which argues
that the current focus on punishment by state governments is
diversionary and that "Anybody who is genuinely interested in the
promotion of the Shari'ah in Nigeria must, therefore, first of all
be concerned with the actual living conditions of Muslims." see the
1999 article by Abubakar Siddique Mohammed, Sa'idu Hassan Adamu,
and Alkasum Abba, available on the web site of the Zaria-based
Centre for Democratic Development Research and Training (CEDDERT)
at
http://www.ceddert.com/Article2.htm
+++++++++++++++++end profile++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Africa Action Note to Readers
Those of you who already contribute to Africa Action should shortly
be receiving in the mail Africa Action's Special Report for 2001,
along with a request for your continued support this year. Among
other topics, the report covers the merger and our campaign for
Africa's Right to Health. It notes our extensive outreach, both
through mainstream media and through our own media outlets such as
this list and our web site (
http://www.africaaction.org). Thanks to
those whose sites link to ours, including many of you, our web site
now ranks in the top 10 out of approximately 15 million sites in a
search for "Africa" on the popular Google search engine.
For those of you who value this information and our other work but
have not yet made a contribution to Africa Action, please read the
latest letter from Salih Booker on our site at
http://www.africaaction.org/join.htm, follow the links to the new
report, and make a contribution on-line or print out a contribution
form to mail in.
International Secretariat of Amnesty International
http://www.web.amnesty.org
Press Release
25 March 2002, AFR 44/008/2002, 54/02
Amnesty International and Baobab for Women's Human Rights welcome
the decision by the Sharia Court of Appeal of Sokoto State, in
northern Nigeria, to act positively on Safiya Yakubu Hussaini's
appeal against her sentence of stoning to death for adultery and
ordering her acquittal. Safiya was condemned to the death penalty
on 9 October 2001 in a Sharia Court in Gwadabawa, Sokoto State.
Baobab and Amnesty International are however, deeply concerned
about the implementation of new Sharia-based penal codes since
January 2000 in a number of northern states in Nigeria. Both human
rights organisations have observed serious violations of human
rights principles and international law during the implementation
of the extension of Sharia law to specific criminal cases,
including Safiya Hussaini's. The two organisations wish to remind
that there is an increasing number of people being sentenced to the
death penalty, flogging or amputation as a result of sentences
passed by Sharia courts in Northern Nigeria.
Amnesty International and Baobab acknowledge that Sharia law has
historically been applied to Muslims in several states of Nigeria,
in some cases related to Muslim personal law. For those cases,
Islamic law coexists with the Nigerian law. In this respect,
Amnesty International and Baobab take no position on the
introduction and application of Sharia law per se, as long as it is
carried out in full respect of international human rights
standards, and in accordance with the conventions of international
law signed and ratified by Nigeria.
Baobab and Amnesty International's main concerns regarding the
extension of Sharia law are:
1. Cruel, Inhuman and degrading punishments: Punishments such as
stoning, flogging or amputation are considered cruel, inhuman and
degrading treatment by international human rights standards. By
ratifying the Convention Against torture in June 2001, the Federal
Republic of Nigeria has decided to bind itself not to apply such
punishments. Since 2000, amputation and flogging have been carried
out in several states of northern Nigeria and Safiya Hussaini had
first been sentenced to stoning.
2. Failure to meet International Standards of Fair Trial: Baobab
and Amnesty International are concerned that Sharia courts may fall
short in guaranteeing the right of representation. This is
particularly serious for cases where the death penalty and other
irreversible punishments can be imposed.Safiya Hussaini did not
benefit from full legal representation in her first trial, when she
was sentenced to death.
3. Discrimination on grounds of gender: Under the Maliki school of
thought, which dominates the interpretation of Sharia in northern
Nigeria, pregnancy is considered sufficient evidence to condemn a
woman for Zina, an offence which is to be read as adultery or as
voluntary premarital sexual intercourse. The oath of the man
denying having had sexual intercourse with the woman is often
considered sufficient proof of innocence unless four independent
and reputable eye-witnesses declare his involvement in the act of
voluntary sexual intercourse. Safiya Hussaini was sentenced to
death in her first trial for adultery on the basis of her
pregnancy.
Based on the cases of Bariya Ibrahim Magazu and Safiya Hussaini,
Baobab for Women's human rights and Amnesty International emphasise
that Sharia Law as practised in the northern states of Nigeria,
does not protect women from possible sexual assault and coercion,
instead it is willing to punish the victims of such assault. In
both cases the Court has not pursued the allegations of coercion.
The clear implication of thiws decision is that men violate and
rape girls and women with impunity as long as they make sure that
there are no witnesses of their crime. On the other hand, women and
girls who are victims of rape or coercion have their situation
further compounded. They will be subjected to charges of Zina and
false accusation. This clearly violates women's rights, justice and
security while protecting those men who harrass, molest and rape
women and girls.
4. Discrimination on grounds of social status: Observation of cases
tried by Sharia courts in northern Nigeria over the past few
months, shows that the convicted are often from deprived
background. Such in the case of Safiya Hussaini.
5. Lack of judicial training of Sharia Court judges: The criteria
for appointing judges do not fulfil international standards of
training for judicial personnel. In the case of Safiya Hussaini, a
lower court handed down the death sentence. The court in question
did not have penal jurisdiction before the introduction of the new
Sharia-based penal codes. Judges are frequently the same and have
rarely received adequate training to judge criminal matters.
6. Procedure of application of Death Penalty: The new Sharia Penal
Codes allow Sharia Courts, often only consisting of one judge and
having no guarantees for adequate legal representation, to impose
the death penalty. Under the Penal Code of Northern Nigeria and
also the Nigerian Criminal Code applicable in southern Nigeria,
cases attracting capital punishment could only be tried by the
State High Court.
Baobab and Amnesty International remind that in all the above
points the current practice and many regulations in the new Sharia
penal Codes and Sharia Codes of Criminal procedure violate many
international human rights instruments ratified by Nigeria,
including the Convention for the Elimination of All Forms of
Discrimination Against Women, the Convention Against Torture and
other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment and The International
Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
Amnesty International is categorically opposed to the death penalty
in all circumstances because it represents the ultimate violation
of the right to life guaranteed by the international law. The death
penalty was introduced for offences which were previously not
punishable by death but by lashing, such as adultery. When the
accused was not of Muslim faith, similar offences were not
considered criminal offences and were not punishable at all.
Amnesty International emphasises that the United Nations Safeguards
guaranteeing the protection of the rights of those facing the death
penalty requires that in countries which maintain the death
penalty, it should only be used for most serious crimes, these are
offences which are intentional and with lethal or other extremely
grave consequences. The act of consensual extramarital sexual
intercourse does not fulfil these conditions.
Amnesty International also underlines that in all criminal cases in
which Sharia law is applied in Nigeria there is discrimination on
grounds of the faith of the accused. The rights of those tried
under Sharia law are clearly protected to a lesser extent than the
Penal Code for Northern Nigeria, valid for non-Muslim people,
particularly concerning the right of representation, the right of
appeal and the lack of knowledge of criminal procedure by the
Court. Under Sharia law, the death penalty is applied for offences
that are not punishable with the death penalty under the Penal Code
for Northern Nigeria.
Amnesty International and Baobab urge the Nigerian federal
authorities to reiterate their commitment to the international
human rights legislation and to take all necessary steps to make
sure that both at federal and states level, all penal cases being
judges under Sharia law meet internationally recognised human
rights standards and honour all the international human rights
legal instruments signed and ratified by Nigeria.
Baobab and Amnesty International also urge the Nigerian federal
authorities to guarantee the constitutional right of appeal for all
those condemned under Sharia-based penal codes ensuring that they
are able to appeal to higher jurisdictions not only at state level
but also at Federal level.
Baobab for Women's Human Rights is a non-profit, non-governmental
women human rights organisation which focuses on women's legal
rights issues under customary, statuary and religious laws in
Nigeria.
Amnesty International is a non-profit, worldwide human rights
movement independent from any government.
- - - -
You may repost this message onto other sources provided the main
text is not altered in any way and both the header crediting
Amnesty International and this footer remain intact. Only the list
subscription message may be removed.
allAfrica.com
World Women Parliamentarians Call for Amnesty for Safiya Husseini
March 21, 2002
[reposted with permission from
http://allAfrica.com]
The Nigerian Justice Minister, Kanu Agabi, has addressed a letter
to the governors of Nigeria's Muslim states warning them not to
allow "zeal for justice and transparency to undermine the
fundamental law of the nation which is the constitution." The
letter came ahead of a March 25 court ruling in Sokoto State on an
appeal lodged by Safiya Husseini, sentenced to death by stoning for
adultery last year. Earlier this week, 130 women parliamentarians,
representing 130 countries, adopted a motion in Rabat, Morocco,
calling for an amnesty for Safiya Husseini and condemning the death
penalty against her. Moroccan parliamentarian Badiaa Skalli, who
presided over the session, told allAfrica.com, the motion may have
contributed to convincing the Nigerian government to act.
Who came up with the idea of circulating the motion?
A number of women parliamentarians circulated it in solidarity with
Safiya Husseini who faces a sentence we consider as unjust and not
conforming to international treaties on human rights. The motion
was adopted without debate, even by the attending Nigerian MP who
said that it would support the will expressed in Nigeria itself to
defend Safiya Husseini.
Did you, as parliamentarians, object to the sentence of death per
se or to the stoning?
No, we objected to the death sentence per se. Stoning is a separate
matter which we did not deal with. Frankly, as Muslim women, at the
parliamentary conference and throughout the Muslim world, we think
that this kind of behaviour has nothing to with Islam. There are
very strict and precise conditions for dealing with the issue of
adultery in Islam. For example, you have to have witnesses who can
confirm the crime did take place. Adultery is punishable in Islam
but not in the uncivilised manner in which Safiya was sentenced to
die.
To what extent do you think your motion may have influenced the
Nigerian government?
The motion may have played a complementary role in the campaign
against Safiya's death sentence. But our decision lent support to
work done primarily within Nigeria itself.
Given the sensitive period Islam's relations with the West are
going through at the moment, how do you assess the impact of
Safiya's case on those relations and how worried are you that
strong Western condemnation could have a reverse effect on this
and future cases?
Frankly, I think that Muslim societies are facing up to a great
challenge at the moment. This challenge has existed for centuries
but it is even greater today. We have to rid ourselves of the
negative aspects attributed to Islam within our own societies
because they harm us as Islamic nations and they hurt our relations
with the West and with other countries in Asia and the rest of the
developping world. Confusing tradition with religion is not right.
We do accept that it is sometimes difficult to change people's
mentalities, but we have to do better because the future of our own
societies is at stake.
There has been a lot of strong criticism for Safiya Husseini's
stoning sentence from many different quarters, including the
European Union. Are you aware of any reactions from organisations
that speak for the muslim world such as the Organisation of the
Islamic Conference, the World Muslim League and other forums?
I think that one of the problems we, as Muslim women, face is that
unfortunately, organisations that represent the muslim world do not
give us even a small opportunity, let alone a great one, to express
our views and contribute to the decision-making process. We still
do not have enough opportunities to express our solidarity with
others through those organisations. As far as I know, there has
been no initiative in this respect, publicised enough throughout
the muslim world. Unfortunately, as far as I can tell from the
press coverage in my own country, none of the organisations that
are supposed to represent the muslim world have spoken about Safiya
Husseini's case. Our hope would be restored if we heard that those
organisations started to pay attention to such matters, which I
admit, are not the gravest challenges facing the muslim world
today. after all, Safiya Husseini's case is an isolated incident at
this point in time. But even when it comes to issues of vital
interest to the future of our societies, our women and children,
those organisations do not deal with the problems facing us as
Islamic societies.
Nigeria: Justice Minister Says Sharia Against Constitution
UN Integrated Regional Information Networks (IRIN)
http://www.irinnews.org
March 21, 2002
Nigeria's federal government has declared the application of strict
Islamic or Sharia law unconstitutional and has asked states using
the legal system to modify it according to the provisions of the
country's constitution.
Justice Minister and Attorney-General Kanu Godwin Agabi, in a
letter to state governors in Nigeria's predominantly Muslim north,
made available to the media on Thursday, said some judgments passed
under Sharia were discriminatory against Muslims. He said this
was contrary to the constitution.
"A Muslim should not be subjected to a punishment more severe than
would be imposed on other Nigerians for the same offence," Agabi
said. "Equality before the law means that Muslims should not be
discriminated against."
He warned: "To proceed on the basis either that the constitution
does not exist or that it is irrelevant is to deny the existence of
the nation itself. We cannot deny the rule of law and hope to have
peace and stability."
Agabi said his office was being inundated with hundreds of protest
letters daily from around the world on the "discriminatory
punishments" being handed down for a number of offences by Sharia
courts. He said Nigeria could not afford to be indifferent to
such protests.
A total of 12 of 19 states in Nigeria's northern region have in the
past two years extended the jurisdiction of Sharia law to criminal
matters and moral offences. Punishments prescribed under the new
code include stoning to death for adultery, amputation of limbs
for stealing, and public flogging for drinking of alcohol and
premarital sex.
So far, the most controversial Sharia judgment in Nigeria has been
a sentence of death by stoning passed on Safiya Husseini
Tunga-Tudu, 35, for adultery in Sokoto State. A ruling on her
appealed against the sentence is fixed for Monday. Sharia has also
fuelled religious violence in Nigeria, split almost evenly between
a largely Christian, non-Muslim south and a predominantly Muslim
north. The new directive by President Olusegun Obasanjo's
government is a significant departure from its previous refusal
to interfere with states that had adopted the strict Sharia code.
Obasanjo had characterised them as political manoeuvres whose
significance would wane with time.
But the latest position is likely to put the federal government on
a collision course with pro-Sharia governors who had threatened to
defy federal directives on the controversial issue.
This material is being reposted for wider distribution by
Africa Action (incorporating the Africa Policy Information
Center, The Africa Fund, and the American Committee on Africa).
Africa Action's information services provide accessible
information and analysis in order to promote U.S. and
international policies toward Africa that advance economic,
political and social justice and the full spectrum of human
rights.
|
