Given the failure of governance so far in the Nigerian State, public analysts are wont to be seen as anti-government. In the circumstance, it’s important that once in a while little steps of sanity in the system are acknowledged and encouraged. We therefore applaud the House of Representatives for its rejection, recently, of an attempt to dismantle the religious neutrality of Nigeria’s Constitution.

On Thursday, October 24, the media reported that a member of the House of Representatives, Hon Aliyu Misau from Bauchi State, introduced a constitutional amendment bill in the House seeking to elevate Islamic law in the Constitution. The bill sought to alter Sections 24, 262, 277 and 288 of the 1999 Constitution by deleting the qualification “personal” to all references to Islamic law. Explaining the need for broader recognition of Islamic legal system, Misau argued that the “Constitution did not envisage the dynamism and development that may come into the country”, citing the advent of Jaiz Bank as Islamic financial institution, in 2003. He therefore called for accommodation of Islamic commercial law and Islamic international law. He was supported by Abdul Hakeem Ado (Kano State), Saidu Abdullahi (Niger State), and Ahmed Satomi (Borno State).

Leading the front against the bill were Hon Solomon Bob (Rivers State), Bamidele Salam (Osun State), Jonathan Gaza (Nasarawa State), Ademorin Kuye (Lagos State), and Awaji-Inombek Abiante (Rivers State). Hon Bamidele Salam’s caution on the secular status of the Nigerian State captured the thrust of opposition to the bill. Mercifully, the vexatious bill was thrown out after the first reading in a voice vote verdict.

The lawmakers who defended the multi-religious character of the Nigerian State deserve commendation. They are to be applauded for standing up for the equality of religious faiths before the law. Section 10 of the 1999 Constitution states that the “government of the Federation or of a State shall not adopt any religion as State religion”. By the letter and spirit of Section 10 of the Constitution, internal religious policies should not intrude in the common sphere of government and administration. No religion should be accorded such recognition as to dominate the public estate. And no religion should be favoured or elevated by singling it out for special treatment.

In 2008, the Anglican Diocese of Awka, Anambra State, filed an application with the National Universities Commission (NUC) for registration of Saint Paul University, Awka. The NUC approved the name of the institution as Paul University, pointing out that its guidelines prohibit the use of religious markers in Nigeria’s university system. To date, many church-sponsored universities suffer the identity loss brought about by this policy of anonymity. And yet, Christianity is a way of life for about half of Nigeria’s population. If Christian identity cannot be established in the name of universities and religious profession is also deliberately omitted in Nigeria’s census forms, on what superior grounds can extension of the Islamic legal system in the Constitution be founded?

I am impressed by the alertness of Hon Bob Solomon and his group. They must have seen through the veil with which the proposed amendment bill was draped. It’s difficult to believe that in the emergency situation Nigeria’s economic woes have forced on majority of the population, any serious-minded legislator would consider advocacy for personal religious interests on the floor of the National Assembly time well spent. How could anyone, of all the suffocating hardships Nigerians are contending with, be concerned with merely removing the word “personal” from constitutional references to Islamic law? Ordinarily, no one would, except where there’s a deeper mix. And in the instant matter, there is.

Hon Aliyu Misau knows that some of us know where his eyes are set. The lawmakers who objected to his bill know the end game of Misau’s harmless-looking bill, even if for political correctness, they chose not to specifically pronounce on it. Perhaps, more importantly, the proponents of the bill consider that they cannot accomplish their mission in one fell swoop. It’s a long-term project. Because of the difficulties involved, the route of achieving one item at a time is also being explored. The agenda of Sharia has been on for a long time. And efforts at it will obviously continue. It takes no prescience to predict that this rejected bill will be represented in the National Assembly in the foreseeable future with slight modifications.

I doubt if there are any other issues that have generated as much divisiveness in the Nigerian polity as the quest for introduction of Sharia. This singular subject produced stalemates at the 1978, 1989 and 1994 constitutional conferences. At each juncture, it took the dictatorial power of military rule to force its constitutional tolerance. But for the imposition of the military, Sharia would not have a mention at all in our Constitution. Sadly, since the collapse of the First Republic, we have not had a people’s constitution, with wide input by civil society, subsequently ratified in a referendum.

In 1986, Nigerians were jolted with news of the country’s sudden membership of Organisation of Islamic Countries, as the body was then called. Notwithstanding that Nigeria was under military rule at the time, the development provoked outrage among non-Muslim population. The sense of betrayal generated by the secret admission heightened religious consciousness to the extent that top government positions were subsequently subjected to data analysis of their occupants’ religion. Asked about the decision to join OIC at a public event at the time, then Chief of General Staff, Ebitu Ukiwe, had turned to the Chief of Air Staff, Ibrahim Alfa, seated next to him as he shrugged off the responsibility. “Was there any time we discussed the OIC at the SMC?” he asked. Many believed this was one of the reasons for Ukiwe’s unceremonious removal as CGS.

Recently, we witnessed pitched battles in some states where Muslim students were insisting on wearing hijab in Christian-based secondary schools. The 2023 presidential election further showed how deep religious sensibilities run in Nigeria. APC’s Muslim-Muslim ticket was viewed as disregard for Nigeria’s Christian community. The perceived humiliation had the effect of mobilising support for Labour Party’s Peter Obi as a counter force to religious marginalisation. It’s also instructive that the candidates won majorly in areas associated with their religions.

These should be sobering reality for those contemplating religious supremacy under whatever guise. It will not work. Aside from the demand for equity, social stability and fair play, Sharia is not compatible with our common laws. The philosophies that underpin them are markedly different.

Afuba is Director, Public Administration Circle, Awka.