By Obioma Ezenwobodo LL.M
![](https://thenigerialawyer.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/05/idrinstitute.png")
Background:
In January this year, the Anambra State Government enacted the Anambra State Homeland Security Law, 2025 which amongst other things, seeks to regulate the practices of ‘okite’ or ‘ezenwanyi’, practices associated with adherent of traditional religion in Anambra State. Though the said law is fraught with irregularities and inelegant drafting, the provisions of section 18 of the Law that borders on fundamental rights to freedom of religion and right to freedom of discrimination and others stand out. The said section 18 provides thus:
- Any person who under the practice of “okite” or “ezenwanyi” or under any other guise, administers any substance or charm on or for any other person for the purpose of commission of any offence or for the purpose of accumulation of wealth by supernatural means other than by any known lawful means of livelihood or who publicly propagates the accumulation of such wealth other than by any known lawful means of livelihood, commits an offence and is liable on conviction to imprisonment for a term of 6 years with an option of fine of N20 million or both.
- Any person who performs any sacrifice or dumps on any road or throws into any water body in the State, any charms, substance or items of sacrifice in furtherance of the commission of any offence under sub section 1 of this section, commits an offence and is liable on conviction to imprisonment for a term of 6 years with an option of fine of N20 million or both.
- Any person who misleads the public by purporting to wield any supernatural powers which he is found not to possess or who obtains any reward from any person in furtherance thereof, commits an offence and is liable on conviction to imprisonment for a term of 6 years with an option of fine of N20 million or both.
- For the purpose of ascertaining whether or not a person possesses the supernatural powers under sub section 3 of this section, any such person suspected of misleading the public under sub section 3 of this section shall at the stage of investigation, be subjected to proof that he possesses such powers.
- An investigation made by the police in respect of any offence under this section shall be forwarded to the Attorney General of the State for review and advice before the prosecution of any person suspected of having committed the offence.
A careful reading of the above provisions shows how far-reaching breaches on the exercise of right to freedom of religion, right to freedom from discrimination and other fundamental rights provisions enacted to secure citizens’ rights and liberties. One would have thought that such an important legislation would have been subjected to public hearing and scrutiny by the Anambra State House of Assembly before having it passed into law and gazetted as law of Anambra State.
Offensive to section 36(12) of the CFRN, 1999:
As important as section 18 of the Law is, it failed to define the key words ‘okeite’ and ‘ezenwanyi’ in which the provisions are rooted in thereby leaving their meanings to conjectures. This omission does not only portray inelegant drafting but a failure to answer to a vital constitutional question. Thus, the failure to define these key words makes the provisions null and void, unsustainable and worthless by virtue of section 36 (12) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (CFRN), 1999 (as altered) which provides thus:
“Subject as otherwise provided by this Constitution, a person shall not be convicted of a criminal offence unless that offence is defined and the penalty therefor is prescribed in a written law; and in this subsection, a written law refers to an Act of the National Assembly or a Law of a State, any subsidiary legislation or instrument under the provisions of a law.”
Legislation is drafted in plain language and not in cryptic terms. These keywords in question are not only worded in Igbo language but was neither translated into English nor their meanings defined. Thus, there is no easy comprehension or assimilation of the meaning or import and as such lacks capacity to be obeyed or enforced. On whether any conduct/offence that attracts sanctions must be expressly stated in a written law, the Supreme Court in the case of GEORGE v. FRN (2013) LPELR-21895(SC) (P 18 Paras A -B) held thus:
“Any conduct that must be sanctioned must be expressly stated in a written law to wit: an Act by the National Assembly. That is what Section 36(12) of the 1999 Constitution provides. Such conduct should not be left to conjecture. As well, it cannot be inferred by the Court.”
See also the case of FRN v. Ifegwu (2003) 15 NWLR (Pt.842) 113 @ 216.
Based on these grounds, it is humbly posited that failure to adhere to this strict legislative drafting principle and constitutional provision renders section 18 null and void.
Offensive to section 38 and 42 of the CFRN, 1999:
Even if it is second guessed that the words ‘okeite’ connotes a local concoction/charm that attracts favour and wealth; while ‘ezenwayi’ is a female queen/priest of the gods in Igbo traditional religion/practice, the said section 18 is grossly offensiveness to sections 38 and 42 of the CFRN, 1999. Section 38(1) provides thus:
“Every person shall be entitled to freedom of thought, conscience and religion, including freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom (either alone or in community with others, and in public or in private) to manifest and propagate his religion or belief in worship, teaching, practice and observance.”
In the case of LAGOS STATE GOVT & ORS v. ABDULKAREEM & ORS (2022) LPELR-58517(SC) at pages 42-44, the Supreme Court had the opportunity to interpret section 38(1) of the CFRN, 1999 (as amended) as regards right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion thus:
“Section 38 provides for the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion. It provides in Sub-section (1) that the freedom of thought, conscience and religion includes: “Freedom… to manifest and propagate his religion or belief, in worship, teaching, practice and observance.” Blacks’ Law Dictionary, 8th Edition at page 1317 defines “Religion” thus: “A system of a faith and worship usually involving a belief in a Supreme being and usually containing a moral or ethical code, especially such a system recognised and practiced by a particular Church, sect or denomination. …Courts have interpreted the term religion quite broadly to include a wide variety of theistic and nontheistic beliefs.” ‘Freedom of Religion” is also defined at page 689 thereof as follows: “The right to adhere to any form of religion or none, to practise and abstain from practicing religious beliefs, and to be free from governmental interference with or promotion of religion.” The word “manifest” as used in Section 38 is a verb meaning: “show clearly or appear” See: Oxford Dictionary Thesaurus and Word Power Guide. In Dictionary. Com for iPad, it is defined as: “to make clear or evident to the eye or the understanding; show plainly.” “Practice” is defined as: “to follow or observe habitually or customarily: to practice one’s religion ” ‘Observance” is defined as: “the practice of obeying a law, celebrating a festival or behaving according to a particular custom ” “Propagate” means “to spread an idea, a belief or piece of information among many people.” See: Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary. International Student’s Edition. The plain or ordinary grammatical meaning of Section 38(1) of the 1999 Constitution, as amended, is that every person is entitled to freedom of thought, conscience and religion, including the freedom to manifest and spread his religion or belief in the manner in which he worships, teaches, disseminates or observes the rules or customs of his religion. Sub-sections (2) and (3) further affirm the protection of these rights.”
The use of the terms ‘the term religion quite broadly to include a wide variety of theistic and nontheistic beliefs’ and ‘to be free from governmental interference’ in the interpretation of religious freedom are a guiding signpost to adherence and respect for all religions.
On the other hand, section 42(1) provides on the right to freedom from discrimination thus:
“(1) A citizen of Nigeria of a particular community, ethnic group, place of origin, sex, religion or political opinion shall not, by reason only that he is such a person –
(a) be subjected either expressly by, or in the practical application of, any law in force in Nigeria or any executive or administrative action of the Government, to disabilities or restrictions to which citizens of Nigeria of other communities, ethnic groups, places of origin, sex, religions or political opinions are not made subject; or
(b) be accorded either expressly by, or in the practical application of, any law in force in Nigeria or any such executive or administrative action, any privilege or advantage that is not accorded to citizens of Nigeria of other communities, ethnic groups, places of origin, sex, religions or political opinions.”
In the case of LAFIA LOCAL GOVT v. EXECUTIVE GOVT NASARAWA STATE & ORS (2012) LPELR-20602(SC) at pages 18-19, the Supreme Court had the opportunity to interpret section 42 of the CFRN, 1999 (as amended) as regards right to freedom from discrimination thus:
“A liberal approach must be adopted when interpreting the Constitution and especially the fundamental rights provisions. Section 42 of the Constitution guarantees to every citizen of Nigeria freedom from discrimination on the basis of belonging to a particular community, ethnic group, place of origin, sex, religion or political opinion. The discrimination complained about must emanate from a law in force in Nigeria, or any executive or administrative action of the Government. This includes laws made by the legislative Houses and legislation made by Local Governments, and this includes policy statements. The rights are enforceable against the state, and not against individuals. See Uzoukwu v. Ezeonu 11 (1991) 6 NWLR pt. 200 p. 708.“
In this stance, the law evoking the discrimination complained about is section 18 of the Anambra State Homeland Security Law, 2025.
Therefore, a careful reading of the section 18 reveals an obvious intent on using it to clamp down on practitioners of traditional religion or practice. By virtue of section 14 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (CFRN), 1999 (as altered), the primary responsibility of the state is to secure lives and properties of the citizens but in doing so, the state much respect and adhere to the fundamental right to freedom of religion of the people and denounce any law that discriminate against persons of particular religion. A state that wants to fight criminality should enact legislations that applies to all, not restricted or directed to a particular set of persons. A legislation, such as section 18 targets specifically at the practitioners of traditional religion in the cause of their practice. It does not rest with the state to delve into accumulation of wealth by supernatural powers as that is what almost all religious sects preach and practice. Other religious bodies manifestly conduct prosperity preachings, sowing of seeds, paying of tithes for supernatural open doors, dedication of spiritual objects for wealth accumulation, and use of many other items as spiritual connections to obtain ‘unmerited’ wealth and favour through supernatural means.
Glancing through section 18(2), (3), (4) and (5) of the Anambra State Homeland Security Law, 2025 reveals same symptomatic afflictions earlier indicated. Section 18(2) that talks about performing any sacrifice or dumping same on road or throws them into any water body in the state failed to appreciate the cultural and historical milieu of such practices. Moreover, other religious sects equally constitute environmental pollutions or nuisance by way of noise pollution, desecration of public places with religious fliers/poster, blocking public right of ways during religious events and others. A religiously unbiased government does not cramp down on such practices or criminalizes same but legislate to provide a better way to accommodate such religious practitioners vis-à-vis the rights of non-practitioners. This could be by way of designating some specific water bodies for the religious sacrifices or get the practitioners to liaise in cleaning the water body or public places.
Section 18(3), (4) and (5) are outrageous provisions which if strictly implemented would see to closure of all other religious sects as their claim of possessing supernatural power is something beyond the physical and which lack empirical evidence. Religious belief or faith is rooted in metaphysical reality and its sustenance borders on acceptance as the truth of something which one cannot observe through one’s senses or prove through scientific analyses or logical reasoning. Anything beyond this is science backed up with empirical evidence as to its truth and certainty. Section 18(5) that entrusts the duty of investigating and ascertaining the truth of possession of supernatural power on the Police is faulty as such is not one of the functions of the Nigerian Police Force as provided in section 4 of the Nigeria Police Act, 2020 (as amended).
The offensive nature of section 18 will be better appreciated when re-drafted to incorporate persons from another religious sect. As suggested by a foremost civil rights advocate and journalist Mr. Agba Jalingo, to show manifest biased nature of the section, it could be redrafted thus:
“18(1) Any person who under the practice of pastor, evangelist, bishop, priest, apostle, or under any other guise, administers any oil, mantle, communion or substance on, or for any other person for the purpose of commission of any offence or for the purpose of accumulation of miracle wealth by supernatural means other than by any known lawful means of livelihood or any preacher who publicly propagates the accumulation of such miracle wealth other than by any known lawful means of livelihood, commits an offence and is liable on conviction to imprisonment for a term of 6 years with an option of fine of 20 million naira or both.”
A perusal of the redraft would reveal the stark biasness, impunity, discrimination and annoyance inherent therein which is being condoned, justified and enforced because it specifically applies to a minority religious group who seem to be voiceless and disadvantaged.
Conclusion:
Despite the fact that there is high crime rate in Anambra State which requires concerted efforts to nip at the bud, such should not be used as a smokescreen to harass or intimidate any practitioner of traditional religious belief that is law abiding. Religious differences should not be criminalized neither should religious polarization be exploited to attain political end. Due to the facts that Africans are deeply religious and individuals practice different religions, section 8 of the African Charter on Human and People’s Rights recognizes the absolute right of all individuals to freedom of religion and conscience. Article 18 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948) provides for the right of a person to freedom of religion or belief ‘freedom to change his religion or belief’. Also, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (1966), in its article 18, provides for freedom to adopt a religion or belief’ of one’s own choice. Further, Article 1 of the Declaration on the Elimination of All Forms of Intolerance and Discrimination Based on Religion or Belief (1984) redefined the right of a person to freedom of religion to ‘freedom to have a religion or whatever belief of his choice’. Thus, to change, adopt or have a religion is in each instance qualified by one’s personal choice or preference. This is a basic right which should not be impeded so far no criminal offence is involved.
Obioma Ezenwobodo LL.M
Managing Partner, Resolution Attorneys & Executive Director, Policy and Legislative Advocacy Network (PLAN)obiomadan@gmail.coz
A timely new publication, Casebook on Privacy & Data Protection in Nigeria, co-authored by Olumide Babalola and Uchenna Nnawuchi,📘Casebook on Privacy & Data Protection in Nigeria is now available on Amazon:https://a.co/d/8TmFZrd
______________________________________________________________________
Alexander Payne Co. Law Reports
Contact & Orders 📞 0704 444 4777 | 0704 444 4999 | 0818 199 9888 🌐 www.alexandernigeria.com
______________________________________________________________________ Groundbreaking Guide For Lawyers: Adigwe Publishes ‘Artificial Intelligence For Lawyers’ With Free Research eBook
Authored by Ben Ijeoma Adigwe Esq., ACiarb (UK), LL.M, Dip. in Artificial Intelligence, Director at the Delta State Ministry of Justice, Asaba, Nigeria.
How to Order:
📞 Call, Text, or WhatsApp: 08034917063 | 07055285878
📧 Email: benadigwe1@gmail.com
🌎 Website: www.benadigwe.com
Ebook Version: Access it directly online at https://selar.com/prv626
______________________________________________________________________
[A MUST HAVE] Evidence Act Demystified With Recent And Contemporary Cases And Materials
