Jenda: A Journal of Culture and African Women Studies (2001) ISSN: 1530-5686 ISLAMIST BIGOTS: THE CASE OF SAFIYA HUSSAINI

Tajudeen Abdul-Raheem

The case of Safiya Hussaini, the woman sentenced to death by stoning, by a Sharia court in the northwestern state of Sokoto in Nigeria, continues to drag on. She had been convicted of “adultery” earlier in the year but her sentence was deferred because she was pregnant. The trial judge had been “kind and considerate” enough to allow her to deliver the baby before having her killed. The kindness somehow could not be extended to the right of the innocent child to have his mother’s security and nurture. She has since delivered the baby but the sentence could not be carried out because of pending legal challenges.

It is a case that has rightly provoked revulsion, anger and endless controversies. For Islamophobic elements this is yet another “proof” of the “backwardness” and “irrationality” of Islam and Muslims. Many (and probably the vast majority) of practicing Muslims who are also appalled at the sentence tend to separate Islam from actions perpetrated in the name of Islam by individuals, governments and different groups. The common refrain is “real Islam is not like that” or “this is no proper Islam.”

While this is a legitimate defensive response it is no longer adequate if the dominant image of Islam that people see or experience is the extreme sanction and draconian rules brigade. The same court that found Safiya guilty of adultery set the male partner free on the grounds that there were no witnesses. The rule is that four adults must see the pair in the act. This is a very empirical evidential process that may be difficult to adduce, short of people having a go at it in an open space in broad daylight! One can safely say that the rules are so stringent because this type of “crime” is not meant to be judged on by ordinary mortals, that Allah may be delaying verdict till the day of judgment since HE alone is omniscient and omnipresent and do not need mortal witnesses!

The judge that could not find the man guilty had no problem handing out judgment on the woman. Could this really be just? Did Allah set out to punish only the woman and not the man? Did this woman put herself in the family way by herself? Could this be another Immaculate Conception more than two centuries after that of Jesus from the Virgin Mary? If the judge’s knowledge of the biological processes is so limited why did he not seek the help of knowledgeable professionals. There is something called DNA test which could determine with accuracy that the father of the child is. If the judge cannot trust DNA why could he not wait till the child was born to do the crude test as has been done from time immemorial: Does the child resemble the man? Are there other traces of family similarities? The haste with which the verdict was reached betrayed a gender-bias justice that is out to get women and find mitigating circumstances for men to go scot-free.

The Sharia as practiced politically in Nigeria is not only gender biased it is also class biased. There have been cases in which children of rich, well-connected and local power wielders and brokers have been caught breaking the no alcohol’s rules, stealing and even aggravated burglary, but the Sharia courts dealt with them lightly. One of the many such cases I heard during my recent visit to the country is simply ridiculous. A man who should have been convicted of theft and had his hands chopped off was instead found guilty of “betrayal of trust” because he knew the person from whom he had stolen! It is twisted logic. But the truth was that because of the class background of the thief the presiding judge could not impose the extreme sanction.

This reveals the real contradictory processes involved in the politics of Sharia in Nigeria. The ordinary people who support Sharia are trying to find a common value system and shared goals, call it a new social contract, that binds the rulers and the ruled and guarantees social stability and justice. They think it is because the rulers are not good Muslims that is why the system is so corrupt and alienating.

However, elite official Islamists want to control the masses using extreme sanctions. They do not desire the accountability that the masses are craving for. In the process, however, they have shown themselves up as hypocrites and opportunists who do not often practice what they preach. At best, many of them are like the Arab Sheiks who impose Sharia at home but disappear to exclusive parts of Europe and America to enjoy the most hedonistic pleasures that money and technology could buy. It is a structure of power that needs hypocrisy to maintain it. For the Sharia states of Nigeria, their elite do not even have to go out of the country to eat their cake and have it. They just move over to a neighboring non-Sharia state to enjoy all the “sins” they have outlawed at home. In some cities like Kaduna a kind of ethnic and religious Bantustans are developing very fast.

These contradictions are neither going to enhance the spread of Islam or the rule of law. At a time when Muslims are the butt of all kinds of prejudice and many things blamed on Muslims, it may be difficult for many to come out to debate, let alone condemn, some of the abuses and misuses of Islam by powerful vested interests. One risks being called a traitor to the faith. However being truthful should not be considered a weakness. There is no holier month in the Muslim calendar than this month of Ramadan. Some home truth and frank debate would to be out place. In the name of all that is decent, Safiya should not die.

Copyright 2001 Africa Resource Center, Inc.

Citation Format

Abdul-Raheem, Tajudeen (2001). ISLAMIST BIGOTS: THE CASE OF SAFIYA HUSSAINI. Jenda: A Journal of Culture and African Women Studies: 1, 2.