Institutional Approach to Muslim’s Right to Freedom of Religion in Nigeria: A Case for Firdaus Amasa By Abba Hikima

In spite of the cliché among lawyers that legal arguments are meant for the courts, the argument and position dealing with right to freedom of religion is as handy and paramount as to be advocated and practically upheld by every Nigerian Muslims working in public or private sectors. A careful look at the nature and approach of Nigeria’s public institutions vis-à-vis Muslim citizens’ religious rights and freedom, reveal nothing but ugly picture of institutionalised disrespect, infringement and violation of their religious rights. We have seen several cases where Muslims get disadvantaged and/or victimized for seeking to perform their religious duties. We have seen the recently concluded military recruitment screening exercise which took place in the holy month in which Muslims observe their obligatory fasting. We have records of Muslims getting penalized for excusing themselves for prayers in meetings or lectures. We aren’t oblivious of instances where examinations had been fixed on Friday spanning through prayer times. In worst cases, Muslim women are forced to violate certain sacred principles by enforcing on them some grossly incompatible dress codes for the sake of upholding certain ridiculously archaic conventions. Apart from the relevant constitutional section guaranteeing the freedom of manifestation by every Nigerian of his/her religious inclination, a sister-section (42) in the same chapter of the constitution proscribed discrimination in form of subjecting either expressly or by practical application of any law in force in Nigeria or any executive or administrative action of the government to disability or restriction on the basis of religion, sex or ethnic background. Replicas of these constitutional guarantees are contained in other regional and international instruments to which Nigeria is a party and duty bound to respect. Upon all these clear legal provisions, the rights remains only in the statute books. Hence, it could be safely stated that the degree at which Muslims right to religion in this country is being flaunted, is rather institutionalised. This is most regrettable when the infringement is perpetrated by institutions like Council of Legal Education or the various Law Schools shouldered with the responsible of instilling the true spirit of activism and upholding the rule of law in potential lawyers. It is pertinent to reemphasize at this juncture that Islam as a religion does not only begin and end in the mosque. It is embedded in the day-to-day enterprises of Muslims spanning to themes like; mannerism, modes of dressing, variety of foods permissible etc. It is important that Muslims understand this and enforce it as of right. No Muslim must be disadvantaged or discriminated upon or restricted on the basis only of his/her religion. So long as the right still exists, government offers, recruitments and duty rosters must have due regard for every bit of these Islamic injunction. Muslims must never allow any person or authority to subject them to any form or penalty on the grounds of non-compliance with any rule or convention. we must also understand that we aren’t done any favours by being so allowed. This is the spirit of the law and arrow of judicial interpretation in several cases. The courts maintain that the Muslims’ right to religion is not only limited to the spiritual observance of the 5 daily prayers. Nothing contrary to this is as defensible as this. We must therefore fight the legal battles to ensure that these rights are respected effortlessly. The Islamic faith is radically distinct from the Christian one, Muslims’ right to freedom of religion cannot be guaranteed unless and until Muslims are not coerced into rallying against the very tenets of their religion in the name of convention or advancement of any rule. The fact that In Islam women are obligated to never expose their hair makes the case of Firdaus Amasa , the lady that has just been barred from making it to the Nigerian Bar a strong one. The argument supposing that she should have removed her “hijab” (expose her hair/violate her Lord’s commandment) so she could get the certificate to subsequently fight for her right is a flaunted as anything because it does not envisage an end to the long practiced injustice. More so that the prerogative of preferring the call to bar certificate over a religious duty is absolutely a personal one. It neither amount to commission of any crime nor strip her of the right to pursue a judicial remedy that would surely vindicate the purports of the right and clear the way for the succeeding generation of women aspirants to the Nigerian bar. Amasa’s stance is therefore as particularly heroic and exemplary. Learning that she was from the onset prepared to postpone her Call in order to set the record aright was also especially impressive. Indeed somebody need to put a stop to the apparently unconstitutional practice. Someone (Firdaus Amasa) has to champion the cause of the Muslim women in the legal profession. This is her personal prerogative. Thus, faulting a free human being for exercise a harmless personal decision amount to nothing but preemptive encroachment of civil liberty. Finally, to the Muslim lawyers, If Islamic brotherhood is anything to the several thousands of Muslim lawyers, they should be seen putting all hands on deck to finally put this matter and several similar ones in the public sectors of this country to a final rest. As for Firdaus Amasa, I trust you will never regret your resistance. You have already gone down down into the good books of history as an upright selfless heroin. Stay blessed.]]>