Shariah Law in Southwestern Nigeria: Clearing the Misconceptions and call for tolerance and coexistence


The recent opposition to the establishment of Shariah courts in southwestern Nigeria—particularly in Oyo, Ekiti, and Ogun States—is yet another example of non-Muslim resistance to Islamic rights and practices.

This is not new. We have seen the same pattern before:

1. When Muslim students wanted to wear hijab in schools, they faced fierce opposition, even though it did not affect non-Muslims. Alhamdulillah, the Supreme Court has upheld their right to do so.
2. When Islamic banks like Jaiz were introduced, they were met with criticism. But today, many non-Muslims are customers of non-interest banking.
3. When Sukuk bonds (a Shariah-compliant financial instrument) were introduced, there was an outcry. Today, the Nigerian government and businesses rely on them for infrastructure funding.

Yet, after all the noise, many of these same critics eventually embrace what they once condemned.

This raises important questions:

– Why do non-Muslims feel so threatened by practices that are exclusively for Muslims and do not affect them?

– Why is there such an obsession with opposing Islamic initiatives when they are not compulsory for non-Muslims?

– Why is it difficult to allow Muslims the freedom to practice their faith in a way that aligns with their beliefs?

Shariah courts are not mandatory for non-Muslims. They are a constitutional right for Muslims who prefer to handle personal affairs like marriage, divorce, and inheritance through Islamic law. As highlighted by Barrister Muideen Olagunju, the only type of Shariah applicable in the Southwest is Muslim Personal Law, covering marriage and marital issue such as divorce, inheritance and maintenance.

Currently, while Islamic marriage is recognized by law, Muslims who want to divorce must go through customary courts, where the judges may not even be Muslims. Similarly, if a Muslim dies and the family goes to court, the property must be shared according to Yoruba customary law (e.g., Idi Igi or Ori Ojori), instead of the Islamic inheritance system, which ensures fair distribution beyond just wives and children.

The unfairness here is not the establishment of Shariah courts, but the denial of a legal system that allows Muslims to practice their religion fully.

What Shariah Law is NOT

Shariah courts in the Southwest will NOT impose Islamic law on non-Muslims. Shariah courts will NOT replace the existing legal system.

Non-Muslims are NOT affected in any way.

Just as Christians are not forced to use Shariah courts, Muslims should also not be forced to use customary courts that do not align with their religious beliefs. Is that not fair?

Many developed countries where Muslims are a minority allow Islamic arbitration for Muslims. Yet, in Nigeria—a country where Muslims are at least 50% of the population—why is it a problem when Muslims request their rights?

It is time to let go of baseless fear and unnecessary opposition. Just as Christians have their rights, Muslims also have theirs and neither should interfere with the other. Live and let live.

The reality is, just like the hijab case, if this opposition continues, it will eventually go to the Supreme Court, which will affirm the right of Muslims to have Shariah courts. So why create unnecessary conflict when peaceful engagement can resolve the issue?

Let us respect each other’s beliefs and allow all citizens to exercise their constitutional rights.

May Allah guide us all to truth and justice. Ameen.

Read Also: Book Review: HEALTHFUL ḤAJJ: A Wellness Guide to Ḥajj and ‘Umrah by Dr. Mariam V. Lawal

Have any Question or Comment?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

error: Content is protected !!
Chat With Our Agent!