|
Get AfricaFocus Bulletin by e-mail!
Format for print or mobile
Nigeria: Shari'a Manipulation
AfricaFocus Bulletin
Sep 22, 2004 (040922)
(Reposted from sources cited below)
Editor's Note
A new report from Human Rights Watch on implementation of Shari'a
law in 12 northern Nigerian states stresses that "the application
of Shari'a in Nigeria has revealed patterns of fundamental human
rights violations which are not peculiar to Shari'a but typify the
human rights situation in Nigeria as a whole." The researchers
report widespread sentiment in the states concerned that the way
Shari'a has been implemented has been manipulated for political
purposes.
The report, which criticizes lack of due process, discrimination
against women, and other abuses, does not claim to examine Shari'a
as such. It stresses the multiple interpretations of the term
within Islam, and the concerns for social justice that many Muslims
think should be key to the concept of Shari'a.
This AfricaFocus Bulletin contains the press release and excerpts
from the summary of the Human Rights Watch report.
For earlier background on this and related issues, see
http://www.africaaction.org/docs03/wom0305.htm,
http://www.africaaction.org/docs02/shar0204.htm, and
http://www.africaaction.org/docs02/ab0209.htm.
Update: The preliminary program for the Oct. 10-13 conference at
the University of KwaZulu-Natal on the history of the international
anti-apartheid movement is now available on the conference website
(http://www.ukzn.ac.za/aam2004). Also recently launched is a
website at Michigan State University for the African Activists
Archive Project, now building a database tracking the archives of
organizations involved in the anti-apartheid movement in the United
States. See http://www.africanactivist.msu.edu.
++++++++++++++++++++++end editor's note+++++++++++++++++++++++
Human Rights Watch Press Release
Nigeria: Under Islamic Law, Rights Still Unprotected
http://hrw.org/english/docs/2004/09/21/nigeri9364.htm
(London, September 21, 2004) - Islamic law courts in northern
Nigeria have failed to respect due process rights, resulting in
discriminatory and harsh sentences, Human Rights Watch said today
in a new report. Human Rights Watch also found that northern state
governors have used Islamic law - or Shari'a - as a political tool
while condoning serious abuses.
The 111-page report, entitled "'Political Shari'a?': Human Rights
and Islamic Law in Northern Nigeria," documents human rights
violations since Shari'a was introduced to cover criminal law in 12
northern states. Since 2000, at least 10 people have been sentenced
to death and dozens sentenced to amputation and floggings. The
majority have been tried without legal representation. Many
sentenced to amputation were convicted on confessions extracted
under torture by the police. Judges in Shari'a courts, most of whom
have not received adequate training, have failed to inform
defendants of their rights.
"If the Shari'a courts had respected the due process rights
enshrined in Nigeria's constitution, many of these sentences would
never have been imposed," said Peter Takirambudde, executive
director of Human Rights Watch's Africa Division.
Some of the human rights violations documented in the report -
such as police torture and corruption in the judiciary - are not
peculiar to Shari'a. Indeed, they are at least as widespread in
cases handled by the parallel common law system.
"State governments and Shari'a courts have not only failed to
respect international human rights standards. They have also
disregarded what many Muslims argue are key principles of Shari'a
itself," said Takirambudde. "They have concentrated on the harsh
aspects of Islamic law while ignoring its principles of generosity
and compassion."
The report highlights discrimination against women within the
Shari'a legislation introduced by the 12 states. Women have been
especially affected in cases of adultery or extramarital sex, where
standards of evidence differ for men and for women, and pregnancy
is considered sufficient evidence to convict a woman. Judges have
also failed to investigate allegations of rape made by female
defendants in adultery cases. The imposition of Shari'a has
corresponded to increased restrictions for women in their
day-to-day life, affecting their freedom of movement and
association as well as their style of dress. Women have been
harassed by Shari'a enforcement groups, known as "hisbah," set up
by state governments. The hisbah have also carried out abuses
against suspected male offenders, particularly those suspected of
drinking alcohol.
As domestic and international concern over the harsh sentences has
increased, the momentum for Shari'a has waned in the past year or
two. Harsh sentences have become rarer, and several death sentences
have been overturned on appeal. However, the legislation providing
for these punishments remains in place, and fundamental abuses
continue.
In northern Nigeria, many Muslims who had initially supported
Shari'a have become disillusioned with the manner in which it has
been implemented. They told Human Rights Watch that this was not
"real Shari'a" but "political Shari'a," but are fearful of being
labeled "anti-Islamic" if they say so publicly.
"State governors have championed Shari'a simply to boost their
popularity. These officials have been willing to sanction serious
abuses to enhance their political standing," Takirambudde said.
However, as popular opinion has shifted, state governors have now
become hesitant to carry out the death sentences and amputations
that have been handed down. However, they are also not prepared to
oppose such punishments. As a result, dozens of people are now
facing prolonged periods of uncertainty in detention while an
amputation sentence hangs over them. Some have been in prison for
more than two years.
The Human Rights Watch report called on federal and state
governments in Nigeria and judicial officials to amend provisions
of the Shari'a state legislation that violate human rights --
particularly provisions for death sentences, amputations and
floggings -- as well as provisions that discriminate against women.
Nigerian officials should stop handing down and executing such
punishments. Human Rights Watch also called for due process to be
respected in Shari'a trials, and for legal representation to be
mandatory in all trials where the offense is punishable by death or
amputation.
Human Rights Watch also urged the international community to extend
its concern about Shari'a to other human rights issues in Nigeria.
"In parts of the country where there is no Shari'a, grave human
rights problems persist," Takirambudde said. "In recent years,
thousands of people have been killed by the Nigerian security
forces or in ethnic conflicts. The international community needs to
turn its attention to these problems too."
Political Shari'a?': Human Rights and Islamic Law in Northern Nigeria
Summary
[Excerpts. For full text and full 111-page report, see
http://www.hrw.org/reports/2004/nigeria0904]
Since 2000, twelve states in northern Nigeria have added criminal
law to the jurisdiction of Shari'a (Islamic law) courts. Shari'a
has been in force for many years in northern Nigeria, where the
majority of the population is Muslim, but until 2000, its scope was
limited to personal status and civil law. The manner in which
Shari'a has been applied to criminal law in Nigeria so far has
raised a number of serious human rights concerns. It has also
created much controversy in a country where religious divisions run
deep, and where the federal constitution specifies that there is no
state religion. Shari'a is seen by many Muslims as an entire system
of guidelines and rules which encompass criminal law, personal
status law, and many other aspects of religious, cultural, and
social life. There are several different schools of thought and
within each of these, different interpretations of the provisions
of Shari'a. Human Rights Watch does not advocate for or against
Shari'a per se, or any other system of religious belief or
ideology; nor do we seek to judge or interpret the principles of
any religion or faith. We are simply concerned about human rights
violations resulting from the implementation of any legal system,
in any country.
This report does not attempt to study the Shari'a system as a
whole. It concentrates on Shari'a in the sphere of criminal law as
applied in northern Nigeria and identifies specific aspects of the
legislation and practices which have led or are likely to lead to
violations of human rights. Some of these practices violate what
many Muslims consider to be Shari'a's own rules and principles, as
well as provisions within the Nigerian constitution. The report
makes recommendations to the Nigerian federal and state governments
for reforming these aspects to ensure conformity with the
international and regional human rights standards and conventions
which Nigeria has ratified.
The provisions for and imposition of sentences amounting to cruel,
inhuman and degrading treatment and punishment, in particular the
death penalty, amputations and floggings, are among the main human
rights concerns arising in the context of Shari'a in northern
Nigeria. Since 2000, at least ten people have been sentenced to
death by Shari'a courts; dozens have been sentenced to amputation;
and floggings are a regular occurrence in many locations in the
north. Human Rights Watch is unconditionally opposed to the use of
the death penalty, in any legal system and in any country, as it
constitutes the ultimate violation of the right to life and an
extreme form of cruel, inhuman and degrading punishment. Human
Rights Watch is also unconditionally opposed to other cruel and
degrading punishments, some of which, such as amputations,
constitute torture.
Of equal concern is the lack of respect for due process which has
characterized many trials in Shari'a courts. The main failings
documented by Human Rights Watch include defendants' lack of access
to legal representation; the failure of judges to inform defendants
of their rights and grant them these rights; the courts' acceptance
of statements extracted under torture; and the inadequate training
of Shari'a court judges which has resulted in these and other
abuses. The practice of convicting defendants on the basis of
confessions alone is particularly worrying in the light of
well-documented torture by the police, other forms of pressure
exerted on defendants by police, prosecution officials and others,
and widespread corruption in the judiciary. Almost all the victims
of these abuses have been vulnerable men and women from poor
backgrounds who have little or no knowledge of their rights or of
legal procedures, or who lack the financial means to obtain legal
assistance, even when they know they are entitled to it. ... Human
Rights Watch believes that had Shari'a court judges followed due
process and had defendants had full legal representation, many of
these death sentences and amputation sentences would never have
been passed especially in view of the safeguards which exist within
Shari'a against harsh and unfair sentencing.
Human Rights Watch is also concerned at provisions within Shari'a
that discriminate against women, both in law and in practice, and
other patterns of human rights violations against women in this
context. Some of these violations do not stem directly from the
legislation itself, but from the way it has been used and from a
climate of intolerance which has accompanied the introduction of
the new legislation.
Human Rights Watch's research into the application of Shari'a in
Nigeria has revealed patterns of fundamental human rights
violations which are not peculiar to Shari'a but typify the human
rights situation in Nigeria as a whole. For example, systematic
torture by the police, prolonged detention without trial,
corruption in the judiciary, political interference in the course
of justice, and impunity for those responsible for abuses occur not
only in the context of Shari'a cases, but are at least as
widespread in cases handled by the parallel common law system.
Indeed, Human Rights Watch's concerns about the state of Nigeria's
justice system are not limited to those areas where Shari'a is in
force. In the south and other parts of the country where Shari'a is
not in application, grave human rights problems persist. Human
Rights Watch has reported extensively on those concerns in other
reports, and is continuing to monitor and raise these issues with
the Nigerian authorities. The information and views in this report
are based on several months of research by Human Rights Watch in
2003, including in five northern states (Kaduna, Kano, Kebbi,
Niger, Zamfara), and discussions in these and other parts of
Nigeria with a wide range of people, including defendants tried by
Shari'a courts, lawyers, court officials, federal and state
government officials, members of the hisbah (Shari'a enforcement
groups), human rights organizations, women's organizations, and
other members of civil society, Muslim and Christian religious
leaders, academics, and many other men and women directly or
indirectly affected by the application of Shari'a. Most of those
interviewed were northerners and Muslims, from different
backgrounds and with a range of views on the question of Shari'a
and the manner in which it is being applied. We also sought the
views of a number of non-Muslims and people from other parts of
Nigeria. In view of the high level of international attention which
has already surrounded the cases of Safiya Husseini and Amina
Lawal, two women sentenced to death by stoning for adultery, Human
Rights Watch has chosen to concentrate in this report on some of
the lesser-known cases where the violations of the rights of
defendants have been equally serious but have received less public
attention. ...
With the exception of state government officials and some
conservative Muslim leaders, the majority of people interviewed by
Human Rights Watch expressed their dissatisfaction with the manner
in which Shari'a was being applied in Nigeria. Many had initially
supported its introduction and continued to profess their
commitment to Shari'a, but explained that they were disillusioned
with the way in which it had become politicized in the hands of
state government officials. The result, in their words, was that
the Shari'a in application was not "proper Shari'a," but "political
Shari'a." They doubted the sincerity of state governors in
introducing Shari'a and complained about politicians' failure to
implement the economic and social aspects, pointing to the
continuing poverty across northern Nigeria and the absence of
visible improvements in their daily lives.
Human Rights Watch takes no position on what constitutes "proper
Shari'a," but our own research confirmed the view that Shari'a has
been manipulated for political purposes, and that this
politicization of religion has led to further human rights
violations beyond those already contained in some of the
legislation. As explained in this report, there is little doubt
that most of the governors who introduced Shari'a into their states
did so primarily for political reasons, in order to secure votes
and increase their popularity. They have been prepared to overlook
and even sanction human rights violations for the sake of their own
political ambitions. They have disregarded the more compassionate
and generous aspects of the philosophy which many Muslims believe
underlie Shari'a, both in the criminal justice sphere and in the
economic sphere.
Since around 2002, the application of Shari'a appears to have lost
steam in northern Nigeria. Shari'a legislation is still in place in
twelve states and Shari'a courts are continuing to function and
hand down sentences; but the political will to be seen to be
enforcing it in a strict manner has waned.
...
It would appear that the combination of external pressure and
domestic disillusion with the manner in which Shari'a has been
implemented has had the effect of dampening the politicians' zeal:
they have realized that their strategy of using Shari'a as a quick
way to boost their popularity is no longer politically viable,
particularly because it has made them unpopular among
constituencies upon whom they had relied for support.
Human Rights Watch believes that the time is right for the Nigerian
federal and state governments to re- evaluate the application of
Shari'a, now that it has been in operation for several years.
Whatever the political considerations some of which are described
in this report federal as well as state government officials have
a responsibility to ensure that the application of Shari'a does not
lead to human rights violations. In practice, this would mean
amending aspects of the Shari'a legislation and removing those
provisions which constitute inherent violations of fundamental
rights, including discrimination against women. But it also means
implementing less controversial measures, such as ensuring that all
defendants are fully informed of their rights, particularly the
right to legal counsel, and that judges are properly trained before
taking on criminal cases, particularly those cases involving death
sentences or corporal punishments. ...
This report also contains recommendations to the international
community. The volatile politics surrounding Shari'a have attracted
significant attention both inside and outside Nigeria. In
particular, the cases of Safiya Husseini and Amina Lawal, two women
sentenced to death by stoning for adultery, captured the public
imagination at the international level and were the subject of
massive publicity. Some of this media coverage has been
ill-informed, selective, and sensationalist. Human Rights Watch
believes that action on the part of foreign governments,
international organizations, foreign media and others can be
instrumental in leading to human rights reforms in Nigeria, if it
is based on an accurate assessment of the situation. The
disproportionate amount of international attention on Shari'a has
led to the erroneous perception that this is the only, and the
worst, human rights problem in Nigeria. Yet there are numerous
other human rights violations in Nigeria which are at least as
serious and deserve urgent attention on the part of the
international community. Thousands of people have been killed in
inter-communal conflicts or in massacres by the Nigerian army;
extrajudicial killings and torture by the police are routine across
Nigeria; and more than two thirds of the prison population have not
even been tried. Human Rights Watch urges readers of this report to
extend their concern about Shari'a to some of these other problems,
which have been documented in detail by Nigerian and international
human rights organizations, including Human Rights Watch.
AfricaFocus Bulletin is an independent electronic publication
providing reposted commentary and analysis on African issues, with
a particular focus on U.S. and international policies. AfricaFocus
Bulletin is edited by William Minter.
AfricaFocus Bulletin can be reached at africafocus@igc.org. Please
write to this address to subscribe or unsubscribe to the bulletin,
or to suggest material for inclusion. For more information about
reposted material, please contact directly the original source
mentioned. For a full archive and other resources, see
http://www.africafocus.org
|
