By Chief Malcolm Omirhobo
The recent statement credited to the Sultan of Sokoto, His Eminence Muhammadu Sa’ad Abubakar III that Christians must not be subjected to Sharia law would have carried far greater constitutional weight if he had been forthright enough to define which aspect of Sharia law he was referring to. Is the Sultan speaking of:
1. Sharia Civil / Personal Law (marriage, divorce, inheritance, waqf and other personal matters), which is purely religious and cultural, voluntarily applicable to Muslims only, and constitutionally recognised under Sections 262 and 277 of the 1999 Constitution; or
2. Sharia Criminal Justice System, which has no constitutional foundation, and whose enforcement by several Northern States constitutes a continuing violation of the supremacy and secularity provisions of the Constitution? This distinction is not academic. It is constitutional.
The Constitutional Problem with Sharia Criminal Law While the Constitution permits Sharia Courts of Appeal to exercise civil jurisdiction only in Islamic personal law matters (Sections 262(2) and 277(2)), nowhere does the Constitution authorise Sharia Courts to exercise criminal jurisdiction.
Criminal law and criminal jurisdiction in Nigeria are creatures of the Constitution and federal or state legislation enacted within constitutional limits, not of religion.
The continued enforcement of Sharia criminal codes directly offends: Section 1(1) & (3) Supremacy of the Constitution over all persons, authorities, customs, and laws. Section 10 – Prohibition of adoption of any religion as State religion. Section 36(12) – No criminal offence or penalty without written law enacted by a competent legislature.
Section 38(1) – Freedom of thought, conscience and religion, including freedom to manifest religion or not. Section 42(1) – Freedom from discrimination on grounds of religion.
If Sharia criminal law cannot constitutionally apply to Christians, it equally cannot constitutionally apply to Muslims, because criminal justice is not a matter of personal choice or culture, but of constitutional authority.
Selective Silence and Unanswered Questions If the Sultan truly opposes religious coercion and unconstitutional excesses, Nigerians are entitled to ask: Where was the Sultan’s unequivocal condemnation when Deborah Samuel was brutally murdered for alleged blasphemy? Where was his voice when Hisbah officials harassed Christians during Ramadan fasting periods?
When alcohol lawfully owned by non-Muslims was confiscated and destroyed? When fashion houses were invaded and mannequins destroyed? When citizens were subjected to discriminatory dress-code enforcement under religious pretexts?
These acts violate not only morality but also Sections 34 (dignity of the human person), 35 (personal liberty), and 41 (freedom of movement) of the Constitution. Silence in the face of such violations undermines the credibility of later calls for tolerance.,
The Constitution Comes Before the Sultan not the other way around Nigeria is constitutionally secular, even if politically inconsistent. No religious leader , Sultan, Pastor, Imam, or Priest has constitutional authority to define, limit, or suspend citizens’ rights. Only the 1999 Constitution does.
The moment the Sultan concedes that Sharia cannot bind Christians, he must also concede that Sharia criminal law has no place anywhere in Nigeria, because criminal jurisdiction does not flow from religion, tradition, or faith but from constitutional competence.
A Call for Constitutional Consistency If the Sultan genuinely seeks peace and national cohesion, he must go beyond carefully worded rhetoric and:
1. Unequivocally condemn all unconstitutional killings and religious violence, irrespective of the victims’ faith.
2. Publicly denounce Hisbah abuses and religious vigilantism.
3. Affirm the supremacy of the Constitution as the only lawful instrument binding all Nigerians Muslims, Christians, and others alike.
Anything short of this remains selective morality, constitutional ambiguity, and dangerous rhetoric. Chief Malcolm Omirhobo is a Constitutional Lawyer & Human Rights Advocate
