On September 25, the Katsina State Sharia Court of Appeal in Nigeria overturned Amina Lawal's conviction for adultery and a sentence to be stoned to death. Lawal was convicted because she bore a child to a man she was divorced from. She has endured 18 months of appeals against the sentence.
This is an important victory for all who value human rights. In overturning the sentence, the Katsina State court ruled that "pregnancy outside of marriage is not proof of adultery", that Lawal's "confession" was not legally a confession and that her rights to a legal defence had been inadequate. This sets precedents in Nigeria's relatively young Islamic law system.
Nigeria's dominant northern elite has been pushing to impose sharia (Islam-inspired) law on the country for some time. So far, 12 of Nigeria's 36 states have adopted sharia penal codes.
Nigeria's sharia law carries harsh punishments — including amputations for theft and whippings for forbidden sexual behaviour. Since the sharia courts became prevalent, several women have been convicted of adultery and sentenced to death. All these women, however, have had their sentences overturned on appeal.
The struggle over sharia law reflects broader political imbalances in Nigeria. Nigeria has a history of division between the mainly Islamic north and the south, where the people are mainly Christian or follow traditional African religions. The northern elite's maintains a stranglehold on the military establishment. However, Nigeria's vitally important oil industry is located in the south.
Although President Olusegun Obasanjo, a former military dictator, is a southern Christian, he has not challenged the northen elite's power. Obasanjo has the support of key factions of the military, which means the Nigerian central government is extremely sensitive to the northern elite's sensibilities.
Teenager Bariya Ibrahim Magazu, however, was not so lucky. Raped by three of her father's friends, possibly as "payment" for his debts, she fell pregnant and was subsequently convicted of "fornication". She was sentenced to 100 lashes, and an additional 80 lashes for "false accusation" of rape. She was unable to call her rapists — or witnesses to her rape — to appear in court.
A rapid feminist campaign in Nigeria and abroad forced the court to drop the false accusation conviction, but in a clear statement of defiance, local authorities administered the 100 lashes in public on January 22, before Maguzu had a chance to lodge an appeal.
One of the key Nigerian groups supporting Lawal is Baobab: Women's Human Rights. Baobab has been critical of sharia penal codes, arguing that they discriminate against women, persecute the poor and include "cruel, inhuman and degrading punishments".
However, Baobab also argues that opposing the sharia courts outright is not a useful strategy. In a letter written in May by Baobab leaders Ayesha Iman and Sindi Medar-Gould, they point out that in the current world context, in which Western governments and media equate Islam with terrorism and barbarism, support for Islamic law is increasing in many communities.
Instead of taking Lawal's case through the civil courts, for example, her lawyers sought to challenge the sharia court's interpretation of Islamic law. In their letter, Iman and Medar-Gould explain: "Muslim discourses and the invocation of Islam have been used both to vindicate and protect women's rights in some places and times, and to violate and restrict them in other places and times — as in the present case. The same can be said of many, many other religions and discourses (for example, Christianity, capitalism, socialism, modernisation to name but a few).
"The point is for us to question who is invoking Islam (or whatever belief/discourse) for what purposes, and also to acknowledge and support internal dissent within the community involved, rather than engaging in a wholesale condemnation of peoples' beliefs and cultures, which is seldom accurate or effective in changing views within the affected community."
Baobab concentrates not only on legal work, but in work with local communities, convincing neighbours and friends of those convicted that the application of sharia law is wrong and unjust.
The decision in the Lawal case, made after intensive lobbying locally and internationally and a campaign within Nigeria, gives sharia courts a precedent to overturn barbaric interpretations of the law. But how successful this will be in the long-run is still unclear.
BY ALISON DELLIT
From Green Left Weekly, October 1, 2003.
Visit the Green Left Weekly home page.