Abstract
A Borno State High Court case, Garba Mai Tangaran v. Abdullahi Mai Taxi, an appeal under section 272 of the 1999 Constitution from the judgement of the Upper Area Court No. 2, which judgement was delivered on the 28th of June 2002 is one case that has made a judicial pronouncement on the criminal jurisdiction of the Shari'a Court of Appeal of a State. The High Court held that the State House of Assembly cannot enact a law to confer appellate jurisdiction in criminal matters on the Shari'a Court of Appeal. Section 6(1) and (2) as well as section 8(1), (2) and (3) of the Borno State Shari'a (Administration of Justice Law) 2000 provide for the appellate jurisdiction of the Shari'a Court of Appeal of the State.The legislative competence of the State in enacting legislation in respect of the criminal aspects of shari'a is only one of the many issues that trail the Zamfara State 1999 initiative in reintroducing the hudood in Nigeria. The other areas are, (1) law of evidence, and (2) fundamental rights. Some commentators have claimed that because of these issues, the criminal aspects of shari'a cannot be enforced in a state with a plural legal system like Nigeria. This paper espouses a different opinion. It concludes that in spite of the misgivings, there are no apparent contradictions in the existence of a plurality of laws within a single jurisdiction and that hudood is enforceable in Nigeria.However, the paper observes that there are several issues that need to be tackled in order to ensure that the fundamental rights of convicts, who are now awaiting the ratification of their Hadd convictions by State Governors, are not unwittingly abused.
Published Version
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call