BIAFRA | Wed Mar 29, 2017 | 11:27PM CET


Photo from left -  IPOB leader Nnamdi Kanu, Justice Binta Nyako, President Muhammadu Buhari

Federal High Court Abuja presided over by justice Binta Nyako had recently been overtly manipulated, Binta Nyako   contradicted her ruling on Mazi Nnamdi Kanu, the director of Radio Biafra and the Leader of the indigenous people of Biafra (IPOB) and three other agitators, Benjamin Nwabugwu, David Nwawuisi and Chidiebere Onwudiwe. 

On the 10th of January 2017, Justice Nyako ruled out a  secret trial against the defendant. On the 20th March 2017 she surprisingly made a u-turn and reversed her previous ruling on secret trial allowing the federal government shield the identities of witnesses billed to testify against the defendants under Sharia law.

However, the contradiction of her ruling is a clear indication of a compromised judge serving as a willing tool ready to be used to achieve a pre-planned verdict against defendants. 

According to encyclopedia of Britannica, Sharia law is the fundamental religious concepts of Islam known as (Islamic law), presided by Khadi assisted by Khadis, thus only applicable in an Islamic state like northern Nigeria, which says that the Sharia law is for Muslims only and must not be used to judge a Christian.

Thus, the Nigeria constitution of 29th May 1999, has in it four district legal systems; English law, common law, customary law and Sharia law. English law is derived from the colony; common law is a development from its post colonial.

Customary law is derived from indigenous traditional norms and practice, while Sharia law known as (Islamic law) is a religious law only practice in some states in northern Nigeria.

The Nigeria constitution though allowed all the thirty six states to have Sharia courts rather than customary courts in the  predominantly Christians in southern Nigeria.

The Sharia Court was allowed to be created in the thirty six states of the federation, because some mischievous elements want to make the world see Nigeria as an Islamic state, that is why in the Nigeria constitution 1999 Sharia was mentioned 73 times, Muslim 10 times, Grand Khadi 54 times, Islam 28 times and there is no single mention of Christ, Christian, Christianity or church Bishop, (Joseph Bagobiri) opined.

However, adoption of a particular religion by states is a good example of Islamization in a country like Nigeria, occupied by people of different Religion, ethnic and cultural values. Thus, one can only think or say that Justice Binta Nyako is being used to enforce Islamization agenda of APC government by enforcing a Sharia law in her kangaroo court

Another example of Islmization of Nigeria is the Abdullali Salame bill for constitution amendment. Salame is the law maker representing Gwadabawa/Illela federal constituency, Sokoto state. He presented a bill for an act to alter sections 266 and 277 of the constitution of federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 to increase the jurisdiction of Sharia court of Appeal of the FCT and Sharia court of Appeal of a state with criminal matters.

However, when Mr. Salame was interviewed in premium Time, he dismissed the claim by Christian organization, insinuating that his controversial pro-sharia bill is armed at expanding Islamic legal system across a secular Nigeria. 

Mr. Salame claimed that his constitutional amendment proposal only seeks to widen the powers of Sharia court of Appeal in places where Sharia legal system currently exists Mr. Salame said; “We are not trying to expand the Sharia law as other people perceived it, that we are trying to take Sharia to other states that have not adopted Sharia like Enugu and Abuja. 
Mr. Salame claimed that the amendment will deter Muslims from continuing with their current behavior of killing Christians and non-Muslim upon any slight provocations in the Northern Nigeria. Especially when there is little argument which will result to ethnic and religious crisis leading to many Christians being killed unjustly. 

Mr. Salame further pointed out that people are doing injustice to Christians in Nigeria just because they are not Muslims, saying that with the bill no Muslim will ever attempt to harm Christians or non-Muslims because the Sharia law can attend to criminal case to conform with APC “Change” agenda on peace and security, (Samuel Ogundipe) premium Time

However, the point made by Abdullahi Salame, he admit that Christians exist in Nigeria, that Nigeria is not only Muslim state, that Christians are being killed in Northern Nigeria upon any slight provocations.

Thus, if the Abdullahi bill to include Sharia law in 266 and 277  Nigeria constitution of 1999 was actually to protect Christians from being killed, knowing fully well that Nigeria state is filled with different religious believe, he should have also make a bill to include Ecclesiastical court, since the Nigeria common law is not enough to take care of matters concern its citizen. If not, the proposed bill, the secret trail, under Sharia law are all good definition of Islamization of Nigeria, 

Though manipulation and compromization of judges which Nyako is one of them.

As a result of this, IPOB will not in any way accept any secret trial or Sharia law of any kind expect the common laws of the federal Republic of Nigeria.

By Onyebuchi Eucharia
Edited & Published
By IPOB Writers
Twitter: @ipob_writers



Vestibulum bibendum felis sit amet dolor auctor molestie. In dignissim eget nibh id dapibus. Fusce et suscipit orci. Aliquam sit amet urna lorem. Duis eu imperdiet nunc, non imperdiet libero.

Post A Comment:


Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.