*Says “We Have No Policy Of Religious Discrimination”
![](https://thenigerialawyer.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/09/2026-IDRI-Masterclass.png")
The Nigerian Law School has denied allegations that female Muslim candidates wearing hijab were harassed, intimidated or prevented from participating in the Bar Final Examinations held on Saturday, October 31, 2026, insisting that its examination procedures are designed to protect academic integrity rather than discriminate against candidates on religious grounds.
The institution also disclosed that a female student wearing hijab was apprehended during the Bar Part I examinations on October 29 after allegedly concealing an earpod and a mobile phone, an incident it said reinforced the need for strict examination-security measures.
In an official statement dated November 4, 2026, titled “Alleged Exclusion of Female Muslim Candidates Wearing Hijab From the Bar Final Examinations of 31st October, 2026,” the Council of Legal Education rejected reports of religious discrimination against Muslim candidates.
The statement, signed by the Secretary to the Council and Director of Administration, Aderonke O. Osho, described the allegations as false and maintained that the Nigerian Law School respects the constitutional rights, religious freedoms and dignity of all candidates.
The institution stated that it “has no policy or institutional practice of religious discrimination” and “upholds the constitutional rights, religious freedoms and dignity of all candidates, irrespective of faith.”
The denial followed complaints from Muslim rights organisations and reports that some female candidates were prevented from entering examination halls or required to adjust their hijabs before being permitted to sit for the examinations.
The controversy emerged shortly before the commencement of the Bar Final Examinations on October 31, following allegations that a verbal directive had been issued restricting the wearing of hijab by female Muslim candidates.
The Muslim Rights Concern (MURIC), through its Founder and Executive Director, Professor Ishaq Akintola, had raised concerns that candidates wearing hijab could be prevented from sitting for their examinations, particularly at the Abuja, Lagos and Yenagoa campuses.
In a statement issued ahead of the examinations, MURIC argued that the alleged misconduct of an individual candidate should not be used to justify restrictions affecting other female Muslim students.
The organisation maintained that any student found responsible for examination malpractice should face appropriate disciplinary proceedings, but that innocent candidates should not be subjected to collective punishment because of their religious attire.
“Hijab is therefore not the offender. It should not be banned from the examination hall. Taking it out on the other hijab wearers amounts to stereotyping,” Akintola stated.
The organisation subsequently alleged that some hijab-wearing candidates experienced harassment, intimidation and delays while attempting to enter examination halls.
MURIC called for an investigation into the complaints and urged the Nigerian Law School to ensure that female Muslim candidates could participate in their examinations without discrimination.
Other organisations, including the Muslim Public Affairs Centre (MPAC) Nigeria and the Muslim Students’ Society of Nigeria (MSSN), also expressed concerns over the reported treatment of candidates wearing Islamic head coverings.
The Muslim Public Affairs Centre said it had received complaints concerning examination screening procedures at the Bwari and Lagos campuses.
The groups argued that religious attire should not automatically be treated as evidence of examination malpractice and called for a screening process that respected candidates’ constitutional rights.
The allegations also attracted attention following an account by Amasa Firdaus, whose experience concerning the wearing of hijab during the 2017 Call to Bar ceremony had previously generated national debate.
Amasa said that during a visit to the Nigerian Law School’s Bwari Campus on October 31, she observed that female Muslim candidates were allowed to enter four of the five examination halls she visited while wearing hijab.
However, she alleged that candidates assigned to the main multipurpose hall encountered restrictions and were required to remove or adjust their head coverings before entering.
She claimed that two female candidates were visibly distressed by the situation and called for uniform implementation of the institution’s dress-code requirements.
Against this background, the Nigerian Law School issued its November 4 statement rejecting allegations that its examination arrangements amounted to religious discrimination.
The Council of Legal Education explained that the Bar Final Examinations are conducted under established regulations intended to ensure proper identification of candidates, maintain examination security and protect academic integrity.
It said compliance with those regulations was necessary to prevent examination misconduct and safeguard the credibility of the professional qualifying examinations.
In support of its position, the school referred to an incident that occurred on October 29, 2026, during the Bar Part I examinations.
According to the institution, a female student wearing hijab was discovered with an earpod concealed on her person and a mobile phone strapped to her thigh.
The school stated that the incident remained under investigation in accordance with its examination rules and existing regulations.
The disclosure was presented as an example of the security concerns that examination officials must address when screening candidates and monitoring examinations.
The institution maintained that the incident demonstrated the need for effective examination-security measures, while emphasising that such measures must be implemented fairly.
It did not announce any final disciplinary decision against the student or disclose the outcome of the ongoing investigation.
The school also did not suggest that the alleged conduct of the individual student established misconduct by other candidates wearing hijab.
Instead, it maintained that examination-security procedures were necessary for all candidates and were not intended to target any particular religion.
Addressing the constitutional concerns raised by the controversy, the Nigerian Law School expressly acknowledged the protections guaranteed under Sections 38 and 42 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999, as amended.
Section 38 protects freedom of thought, conscience and religion, while Section 42 provides protection against discrimination on specified grounds, including religion.
The school said it “recognises the constitutional protections guaranteed under Sections 38 and 42 of the 1999 Constitution” and “remains committed to respecting the religious rights of all candidates while safeguarding the integrity of its examinations.”
The controversy has also drawn attention to the Nigerian Law School’s dress-code provisions, which recognise black shoulder-length hijabs and veils as acceptable attire for female students in specified school activities.
The Hijab Rights Advocacy Initiative (HRAI) had advised female Muslim candidates preparing for the examinations that hijabs were permissible, subject to the shoulder-length standard prescribed for the institution’s Law Dinners.
That clarification formed part of efforts by stakeholders to address uncertainty surrounding the acceptable form of religious attire during the examinations.
However, the central disagreement remains whether the screening measures applied to some candidates on October 31 were consistent with the school’s stated policy and whether any candidates were unfairly delayed, intimidated or excluded.
The Nigerian Law School has rejected allegations of discriminatory treatment, while the organisations that raised the complaints maintain that the reported incidents require investigation and appropriate action.
The institution’s statement did not identify the number of candidates alleged to have been affected, specify the campuses where the disputed incidents occurred or provide individual accounts of how complaints arising from the October 31 examinations were handled.
It also did not disclose further details of the investigation into the October 29 examination misconduct allegation.
The differing accounts therefore leave unresolved questions concerning the implementation of examination-security measures at the affected centres.
The Nigerian Law School, however, appealed to members of the public and relevant stakeholders to avoid drawing premature conclusions before the appropriate institutional processes had established the facts.
It urged restraint in public commentary and maintained that its responsibility was to uphold both the integrity of professional examinations and the constitutional rights of candidates.
The institution reiterated its commitment to fairness, inclusiveness, professionalism and the uninterrupted discharge of its statutory mandate.
The controversy has renewed discussions within the legal profession about the relationship between institutional dress regulations, examination security and the constitutional protection of religious freedom.
[A MUST HAVE] Evidence Act Demystified With Recent And Contemporary Cases And Materials
Available now for NGN 40,000 at ASC Publications, 10, Boyle Street, Onikan, Lagos. Beside High Court, TBS. Email publications@ayindesanni.com or WhatsApp +2347056667384. Purchase Link: https://paystack.com/buy/evidence-act-complete-annotation
______________________________________________________________________ “Enhance Legal Practice With Authoritative Reports” — Alexander Payne Offers Comprehensive Law Reports, Spanning Over A Century Of Nigerian Jurisprudence
Interested buyers are encouraged to place their orders and enquiries via:
0704 444 4777, 0704 444 4999, 0818 199 9888
Website: www.alexandernigeria.com
