A bill that would have expanded Islamic law under the 1999 constitution has been rejected by the House of Representatives.
Aliyu Missau supported the bill which sought to expand the application of Sharia law within the judicial system by amending certain parts of the constitution by eliminating the word “personal” from any references to “Islamic law.”
Sections 24, 262, 277, and 288 of the 1999 constitution were the focus of the controversial constitutional amendment bill.
It would have expanded its jurisdiction beyond personal affairs by amending Section 262(1), which now provides that the Sharia Court of Appeal shall exercise appellate and supervisory authority in civil actions involving concerns of Islamic personal law.
The word “personal,” according to Missau, restricted the applicability of Islamic law, especially with regard to Islamic economic norms, throughout the argument.
He said, “The 1999 constitution provided for personal Islamic law. The constitution did not envisage the dynamism and development that may come into the country.
“For instance, in 2003, the constitution did not foresee the advent of Jaiz Bank, which operates under commercial Islamic law.”
The congressman stated that, among other things, Islamic international law and Islamic commercial law would gain from the removal of the word “personal.”
Lawmakers were divided along regional lines during the discussion, with those from the North endorsing the law while those from the South opposed it.
Rivers rep Solomon Bob opposed the bill, arguing that it would expand the scope of Islamic law’s application beyond the “personal matters” that the constitution’s authors had in mind.
“The implication is that if the word ‘personal’ is removed, Islamic law would have broader implications. The word ‘personal’ was put there for a reason,” the lawmaker said.
Kano lawmaker AbdulHakeem Ado backed the bill, arguing that it was important to uphold Islamic commercial law.
Among the parliamentarians who testified in support of the bill were Ahmed Satomi from Borno and Saidu Abdullahi from Niger state.
Awaji-Inombek Abiante from Rivers, Jonathan Gaza from Nasarawa, and Ademorin Kuye from Lagos all opposed the proposed law.
Osun lawmaker Bamidele Salam was adamantly against the bill, arguing that since Nigeria is a secular state, religious matters need to be left to individual decisions.
He said, “As students of history, we all know the background of this particular section during the various constitutional assemblies of 1979, 1989, and 1999. The drafters of the Constitution were highly sensitive to religion.
“At the 1979 constitutional assembly, this particular section was very contentious until the military intervened to halt further debate, stating that the application of Islamic law would be restricted to personal matters like estates.
“We must be careful with any changes to the constitution that could further widen divisions in Nigeria. In any case, the matters my colleague seeks to address are already covered by existing laws.”
The deputy speaker, Ben Kalu, who chaired the plenary, led a voice vote that rejected the bill.