ECOWAS Court Challenges Nigeria’s Sharia Blasphemy Laws: Kano Rejects Reform

The ECOWAS Court’s Landmark Ruling

In the case Incorporated Trustees of Expression Now Human Rights Initiative v. Federal Republic of Nigeria (ECW/CCJ/APP/41/23), the ECOWAS Court invalidated two provisions of Kano State’s legal codes. Section 210 of the Kano State Penal Code was deemed overly vague, failing to clearly define what constitutes a religious insult, thus lacking the precision required by international human rights law. Section 382(b) of the Kano State Sharia Penal Code Law (2000), which imposes the death penalty for insulting the Prophet Muhammad, was ruled “excessive and disproportionate” in a democratic society. The court ordered Nigeria to amend or repeal these laws to align with Article 9(2) of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights and Article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) (Premium Times).

The ruling emphasized that while states have a legitimate interest in maintaining public order, laws must meet strict criteria of legality, necessity, and proportionality. The court’s decision sets a precedent for ECOWAS member states, highlighting the need for legal clarity and restraint in regulating expression.

Kano’s Defiant Stance

Kano State’s government rejected the ECOWAS ruling, asserting its constitutional authority to enact laws reflecting the values of its predominantly Muslim population. In a statement, officials cited Section 4(7) of Nigeria’s 1999 Constitution, which grants states legislative power over criminal law, including Sharia-based codes. They argued that blasphemy laws are crucial for upholding religious sanctity and preventing public disorder, emphasizing that freedom of expression is not absolute, particularly when it offends religious beliefs (Leadership).

Kano further contended that Nigeria’s legal pluralism allows for laws tailored to cultural and religious contexts, a hallmark of the country’s federal system. They referenced international precedents, such as the European Court of Human Rights’ decision in Wingrove v. UK (1996), which upheld restrictions on expressions offending religious sentiments. Additionally, Kano argued that the ECOWAS Court lacks supremacy over Nigeria’s Constitution, citing Section 1(3) and the need for domestication of international judgments under Section 12 (Punch).

To address concerns about misuse, Kano noted measures to prevent abuse, such as requiring Attorney General approval for blasphemy prosecutions and organizing judicial training to ensure fair enforcement. These steps aim to curb mob justice and ensure legal accountability.

Human Rights vs. Cultural Norms

The ECOWAS ruling exposes a deep-seated tension between international human rights standards and Nigeria’s pluralistic legal framework. Nigeria’s federal structure allows states like Kano to implement Sharia law alongside secular codes, creating a complex legal environment. While the ECOWAS Court’s decision is binding in principle, its enforcement depends on the federal government, which must navigate state autonomy and political sensitivities. This dynamic raises questions about how Nigeria can reconcile its international commitments with local practices deeply rooted in religious identity.

Human rights groups, such as Rivers in the Desert Nigeria, have urged Kano to comply with the ruling, arguing that the laws are “overly punitive and vague” and have been weaponized to silence dissent (Punch). The Christian Association of Nigeria (CAN) also called for federal compliance, highlighting the laws’ disproportionate impact on religious minorities (Punch). Conversely, Kano’s stance reflects a broader sentiment in northern Nigeria, where religious values are paramount, complicating reform efforts.

Notable Cases of Blasphemy Accusations

The enforcement of blasphemy laws in Kano has led to several high-profile cases that underscore their severe consequences:

• Yahaya Sharif-Aminu: In 2020, a musician was sentenced to death for sharing a song on WhatsApp deemed blasphemous. His case was later ordered for retrial, highlighting judicial inconsistencies (Punch).
• Omar Farouq: A 13-year-old was sentenced to 10 years in prison in 2020 for alleged blasphemy, sparking international outrage. His sentence was overturned on appeal, exposing the laws’ harsh application (Punch).
• Mubarak Bala: The President of the Humanist Association of Nigeria was sentenced to 24 years in 2022 for blasphemous Facebook posts, later reduced to 5 years. His case drew global attention to the laws’ impact on free speech (Humanists UK).

These cases illustrate the potential for abuse, including arbitrary arrests, prolonged detentions, and mob violence, often targeting minorities or dissenters. The ECOWAS ruling aims to address such violations, but Kano’s resistance complicates reform prospects.

Broader Implications

The ECOWAS ruling has far-reaching implications for Nigeria’s legal and social fabric. It challenges the country to harmonize its diverse legal systems with international human rights obligations, a task fraught with political and cultural challenges. The decision also sets a precedent for other ECOWAS member states, potentially influencing legal reforms across West Africa. However, the ruling’s success depends on Nigeria’s willingness to engage in dialogue with state governments and stakeholders to find a balanced approach.

The debate also touches on global issues of balancing freedom of expression with respect for religious beliefs. While Kano’s laws aim to protect religious sanctity, their enforcement often infringes on individual rights, raising questions about proportionality and fairness. The ruling could spur broader discussions on legal pluralism and human rights in pluralistic societies.

Navigating the Future

The ECOWAS ruling offers Nigeria a chance to reform its blasphemy laws to align with human rights standards, but achieving this requires navigating complex political and cultural landscapes. Dialogue between federal and state authorities, religious leaders, and civil society is essential to craft laws that respect both cultural values and individual rights. Kano’s measures to prevent abuse, such as judicial training and oversight, are steps in the right direction, but broader reforms are needed to ensure justice and inclusivity. As Nigeria grapples with this issue, it must strive for a legal framework that fosters unity and respects its diverse identities.

References

• ECOWAS Court Orders Nigeria to Amend Blasphemy Laws
• Kano Rejects ECOWAS Blasphemy Ruling
• Kano Defends Blasphemy Laws
• Rights Group Urges Kano to Repeal Laws
• CAN Challenges Kano’s Blasphemy Law
• Nigeria Must Strike Down Blasphemy Law