Amina Lawal Freed: Whose Justice, Whose Victory?

“One cool judgment is worth a thousand hasty councils. The thing to do is to supply light and not heat.”
– Woodrow Wilson

The Sharia Court of Appeal sitting at Kastina, on Thursday, September 29, 2003, in a majority decision of four to one delivered by the presiding Khadis, discharged and acquitted Amina Lawal, a Nigerian single mother, whose death sentence by a lower Sharia court had been affirmed in March over charges of adultery. Amina Lawal was thus spared the fate of judgment stones that would have been hurled at her, if the judgment passed on her by two lower Sharia courts had been allowed to stand. Though the Sharia Court of Appeal cited procedural errors on four of the five counts on which she was tried, and thus eased her out through this back door, it is highly plausible that the hubbub of international and local indignation against her death sentence also weighed heavily in her favour.

In the aftermath of this momentous verdict, the chest thumping began, personalities and groups claimed her acquittal was a victory for themselves and their ideology: The Supreme Council for Sharia in Nigeria (SCSN) and the Nigerian Supreme Council for Islamic Affairs (NSCIA) described the acquittal as a victory for the Islamic legal system in Nigeria, some legal practitioners claimed her acquittal was a triumph for constitutionalism and a victory for democracy (I expect to see the verdict as center-spread adverts in national dailies as one of the dividends of democracy in Katsina State); women groups have lauded themselves for their achievement in setting her free- a victory for women rights they called it. Same goes for the inimitable human rights groups who championed her cause, their victory anthem: ‘Amina Lawal’s acquittal is a victory for human rights struggle in Nigeria.’ But does anyone care about what Amina Lawal had to say about her acquittal?

In the midst of all this backslapping, the central figure in this melodrama seems obscure. How quickly we forget this poor woman who was stigmatized for an alleged personal act of indiscretion? Have we forgotten that she walked the long mile to her aborted execution alone for a ‘crime’ that demanded punishment for two? Do we expect her trauma of having lived under the sword of Damocles to vapourize in the wake of her sensational acquittal?

Thank God for the four wise men of Sharia, her steps will no longer echo down that lonely mile. So where do the praises of men by men for men fit into her life’s near tragedy? I laud the most erudite Khadis of the Sharia Court of Appeal in Kastina for a sound judgment and insightful application of the tenets of sharia in arriving at this landmark ruling. They have proven that Sharia as a legal system employs due process. But any body of laws is made for just more than that; due process is like a freeway, which transcends ultimately to justice. The poser herein is: how encompassing is this commendable judicial precedent on Sharia application in Nigeria? Would it alter the fortunes of the Amina Lawals of this world, for now, in the near future, or forever?

My grouse with the Sharia Legal code (as it is presently applied) in Northern Nigeria, and I believe, the pervading gripe against it in the world court of public opinion is its perceived selective application of justice. In about four years of Sharia application in about twelve Northern states in Nigeria, not one “big fish” has been accused of any of the sundry crimes over which Sharia holds sway. Till I see one expensive kaftan or boubou sweating under a Khadi’s stern glare, I will continue to express my reservations about any body of laws that treats one criminal any different from another.

In view of the foregoing, there are perceived questions that Amina Lawal’s acquittal failed to answer: for instance, is the Sharia penal code God’s retribution against the Talakawa? Is man’s application of God’s law meant only to chastise alleged adulteresses like Amina Lawal and her predecessor Safiya Hussaini (women with no names)? Should the sharp blade of Sharia only kiss hands of thieving scamps like Mallam Jangedi (the cow thief)?

Just last Tuesday, September 23, 2003, a Sharia Court in Bauchi, Bauchi State sentenced a 20-year-old man, Jibrin Babaji to death by stoning for sodomy. Also in the fray are the three boys he is suspected to have molested, it is alleged that they consented to his indecent overtures for the paltry sum of 50 Naira. The boys were sentenced to fifty lashes of the cane- a stroke for every Naira, I suppose. Unfortunately for Mallam Babaji, I do not forsee long queues of picketing protesters outside Nigerian Embassies and High commissions on his behalf. He was alleged to confess to pedophilia and sodomy, and yet stated that he would appeal the ruling against him. This makes a strong case for the ignorance of the accused under the Sharia legal system, especially in the light of Amina Lawal’s rebuttal of her alleged confession. Under Sharia Legal system a confession must be made four times, the withdrawal of a confession even at the third count stands.

I do not boast of any expertise in Sharia penal and legal systems, but as it is oft said, Justice must not only be done, but must have been seen to be done; every sound judgment must pass the reasonable man’s test. Most of the rulings at Sharia Courts of first instance under the Sharia legal system as it is applied in Nigeria, in my opinion, do not meet the rudiments of justice.

The ruling on Amina Lawal cited procedural errors on a majority of the counts against her. The learned Khadis of the Sharia Court of Appeal unearthed the ineptitude and large scale bungling that characterized her trial at the lower Sharia courts. The judgment disclosed instances of improper investigation of the circumstances surrounding the allegations against her and the abuse of technicalities by the lower court. For instance, the fact that she refuted (withdrew) her alleged confession was completely ignored by the lower court.

Should a poor divorced helpless nursing mother be put through such a harrowing experience? What is the price of her travails? The world was ushered into the arena of her judgment bonanza with statements like: “we want the world to see the wisdom in Sharia.” Yes the world has at last seen the wisdom in Sharia, but when did one woman’s fight for her life become a laboratory test for Sharia?

If Amina Lawal’s freedom was a calculated result of a litmus test to showcase ‘the wisdom in Sharia, then chest thumping by groups such as SCSN and NSCIA can only assume a macabre hue, because their victory is not deserved. But if her acquittal is a vindication of her innocence and the injustice perpetuated against her and her ilk, then Sharia application in Northern Nigeria has taken a laudable first step on the road of reforms, credit to the learned Khadis who gave their verdict. In my opinion any victory song on behalf of Amina Lawal’s acquittal is premature.

If at all there is any criminality in the existence of the Jangedis, the Lawals and Husssains of this world, it is their lowliness in societal hierarchy. I am one of those who believe that the introduction of Sharia Legal system in Northern Nigeria was to underscore a political point against the Obasanjo regime; unfortunately the flexing of such political muscles employs victims like Amina Lawal as laboratory guinea pigs for this experiment. Indeed, I see nothing wrong in the Sharia code as a way of life for Nigerian Muslims, but I see everything wrong with the Nigerian society in its mode of application in Northern Nigeria. Those who pelt Sharia with accusations of barbarism do so for their own good reasons. I see nothing barbaric in Sharia except its perversion as a tool of oppression for selfish ends by the Northern elite.

According to Earl Warren: “It is the spirit and not the form of law that keeps justice alive.” What is the spirit of Sharia

“Justice is the firm and continuous desire to render to everyone that which is his due.” This was the bedrock of ‘corpus juris civilis’ commissioned by Justinian I, and does highlight the deficiency in Sharia application in Northern Nigeria. Sharia Code is just. Therefore, it must guarantee justice to all and sundry- the rulers and the Talakawa alike. Fornication, adultery and theft abide in high places too, why has Sharia not made one of the elite accountable yet? This is a question for Sharia spin-doctors to mull.

The gender bias theory in the history of trials of adultery cases under the Sharia judicial system since its inception in Zamfara State, Nigeria in 1999 has been touted. This theory has not been disproved; women are singled out and prosecuted, while their male partners go scot-free. The pregnancies of these women could surely not have been immaculate conceptions. Does Sharia admit forensic evidence? What about results of paternity tests, what role should its admission or non-admission play in determining paternity of a supposed love child? These are questions, which are yet to be fully addressed, and I am sorry to say, the verdict on Amina Lawal hardly puts to rest.

Long after the echoes of victory songs have turned vestigial, what effect would last Thursday’s judgment on Amina Lawal have on women who share her fate? Will they (the women) be the better for it, since at last; ‘the world has seen the wisdom in Sharia? Just how long do we have to wait before the world witnesses another deprived woman, saddled with a suckling babe, with no man by her side before the full onslaught of Sharia? Just how long before another obscure village swims into worldview and one woman’s iniquities are strung out on the wire from Bujumbura to Bangkok? If Amina Lawal’s ordeal would sublimate ultimately to alleviate the plight of women under the very system that granted her justice, then the justice granted her is absolute, and by extension a victory worth cheering. If not, then the justice granted her was political, meant only to achieve the curious aims of those who granted it for the ‘wisdom’ they wished the world to acknowledge. Should this be the case then all victory songs must collapse into ashes, where justice is a sheathed injustice.

When asked what life portends after her historic acquittal, Amina Lawal gave her response: she wants to get married, raise babies and be happy. This is a simple woman’s dream, and it is the most the likes of Amina Lawal can long for in their present circumstance. She may not be honoured in Rome like Safiya Hussaini, but what plans have been made by the state government for her rehabilitation? Divorced with four children, she is nobody’s dream bride. Amina Lawal despite her acquittal remains deprived, what are her chances of not falling prey to the sins of dependence on another?

I do not mean to denigrate another’s religion or tradition, but suffice it to say that women appear vulnerable under Sharia (as it is applied in Northern Nigeria). There is salient need to empower them economically, spiritually, intellectually and otherwise. It is common sense that the weak link of any system must be strengthened to enhance the overall strength of the system. Sharia must be seen as a safeguard of the rights of women for the pond of its criticisms to dry up. That is the greatest wisdom in Sharia, which the world longs to see.

For those who are bent on singing victory songs, let victory belong to God (by whatever name you call Him), and if any one must do the victory jig, then let it be Wasila (Amina’s one year old daughter), she will no longer be a reason to delay her mother’s execution, rather she has become her motivation to look forward to life with gusto. But if I might ask: what manner of life awaits a divorced mother of four and a fatherless daughter in a society, where women appear defenseless? I do not know, you tell me.