4 weeks ago
33 ARTICLE AD
The House of Representatives has rejected a bill seeking the expansion of the provision for Islamic Law in the 1999 Constitution (as amended).
The bill sponsored by the member representing Misau/Dambam Federal Constituency, Bauchi State, Aliyu Misau sought to amend sections 24, 262, 277, and 288 of the 1999 constitution by removing the word “personal” wherever it is mentioned from the section, allowing “Islamic law” to stand on its own.
Section 262 (1) of the constitution provides “The Sharia Court of Appeal shall, in addition to such other jurisdiction as may be conferred upon it by an Act of the National Assembly, exercise such appellate and supervisory jurisdiction in civil proceedings involving questions of Islamic personal law.”
Leading the debate on the general principles of the bill, the Peoples Democratic Party lawmaker noted that the inclusion of the word “personal” after “Islamic” restricts its application, particularly in Islamic commercial laws.
“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.”
He called for the removal of the word “personal” in the interest of Islamic commercial law and Islamic international law, among others.
During the debate, though Northern lawmakers had a soft spot for the proposed legislation, they met stiff opposition from their Southern counterparts.
In his contribution, the member representing Ahoada East/Abua/Odual Federal Constituency, Rivers State opposed the bill, stating any amendment to the sections would expand the application of Islam law beyond the “Personal matters” envisaged by the drafters of the 1999 constitution.
He said, “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.”
On his part, the lawmaker representing Wudil/Garko Federal Constituency, Kano State, Abdulhakeem Ado, argued in favour of the bill, stating that Islamic Commercial Law needs to be sustained.
The duo of Saidu Abdullahi and Ahmed Satomi from Niger and Borno States respectively supported the proposed law.
The trio of Jonathan Gaza, Ademorin Kuye and Awaji-Inombek Abiante from Nasarawa, Lagos and Rivers States respectively kicked against the proposed legislation.
Also speaking, a PDP lawmaker from Osun State, Bamidele Salam opposed the bill and called for restraint in matters of religion given Nigeria’s secular state status.
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.”
When subjected to a voice vote by the Deputy Speaker, Benjamin Kalu, the majority of the lawmakers present at the plenary session rejected it.
