On Thursday, the Nigerian House of Representatives voted against a bill aimed at broadening the role of Islamic law within the 1999 constitution. Sponsored by Rep. Aliyu Missau, the proposed constitutional amendment sought to modify sections 24, 262, 277, and 288 by removing the term “personal” from references to “Islamic law,” allowing it to stand independently.
The bill’s rejection highlights the delicate nature of constitutional changes regarding religious laws in Nigeria, where balancing diverse religious and cultural interests is crucial. Lawmakers raised concerns that the amendment could have unintended consequences, potentially affecting the country’s secular legal framework.
Section 262 (1) of the constitution states: “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.”
During the debate, Missau argued that the inclusion of the word “personal” limits the scope of Islamic law, especially regarding commercial laws. He pointed out that the 1999 constitution did not anticipate developments like Jaiz Bank, which operates under commercial Islamic law. He advocated for the removal of “personal” to allow for broader applications of Islamic law.
The debate saw a divide along regional lines, with northern lawmakers generally supporting the bill, while those from the south opposed it. Rep. Solomon Bob from Rivers expressed concerns that removing the term “personal” would expand Islamic law’s application beyond the original intent of the Constitution’s framers.
Supporters of the bill, such as Abdul Hakeem Ado from Kano, emphasized the need to sustain Islamic commercial law. However, several lawmakers, including Jonathan Gaza from Nasarawa and Bamidele Salam from Osun, voiced strong opposition, arguing that issues of religion should remain personal, reflecting Nigeria’s secular nature.
Salam highlighted the contentious history surrounding this section in past constitutional assemblies, urging caution with any changes that could exacerbate divisions within Nigeria. He noted that existing laws already address the issues raised by proponents of the bill.
