The Muslim Rights Concern has reacted to the judgment of Justice
Bamgbose Alabi of an Abeokuta High Court in Ogun State who ruled
that “the use of hijab is considered a fundamental human right only
for adults”.
This formed the basis of his judgement on June 4, 2020 in a case
filed by Aishat Abdul-Aleem, an 11-year-old Muslim girl who was
sent out of school at the Gateway Secondary School, Abeokuta in
December 2018.
In its reaction to this judgement, MURIC described the judgement
as judicial namby-pamby.
MURIC’s reaction was contained in a press statement issued by
the Director of the organization, Prof. Ishaq Akintola, on
Monday.
MURIC said: “We reject this judgement in its totality. What
manner of judicial declaration is this? Is the judge telling us
that minors have no religion, no fundamental human rights, not even
a dot in social statistics? Is he telling us that minors do not
exist? Why are minors counted during census? Why do we register
them at birth? Is the killing of a minor judiciable or not? This
judgment suffers from desertification of a human face. It has no
soul. It is judicial namby-pamby.
“The ruling stands in contra-distinction to Section 38 (2) of
the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria which
states inter alia, ‘No person attending any place of education
shall be required … to take part in …ceremony or observance (which)
relates to a religion other than his own or a religion not approved
by his parent or guardian’.
“The above section has clearly and convincingly recognized the
right of minors to enjoy fundamental human rights. It also placed
them under the umbrella of their parents’ or guardians’ inalienable
rights.
“By this arbitrary judgement, the judge has elected to
discriminate against children on account of age. This is contrary
to Article 2 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. What
will happen if a case of rape of a minor is brought to this court?
Can minors ever get redress in this court? Do minors even exist as
far as this court is concerned?
“The judgement in the case of Aishat Abdul-Aleem is a judicial
somersault. It is as arbitrary as it is absurd. It is equally an
unprecedented miscarriage of justice. It cannot hold any water. We
charge the litigants to approach an appellate court without
delay.
“Previous judgements in hijab cases have set precedents which
this judge has chosen to ignore. In the case of Abidemi Rasaq &
3Ors Vs Commissioner for Health Lagos State & 2 Ors, Suit No.
ID/424M/2004, the Lagos High Court declared unconstitutional a
circular issued by Lagos School of Health Technology banning the
students from wearing hijab.
“Also in the case of Provost Kwara State College of Education,
Ilorin vs Basirat Saliu Suit No. CA/IL/49/2009, the Court of
Appeal, Ilorin Judicial Division held thus: ‘The use of veil
(hijab) by female Muslims qualifies as a fundamental right under
section 38 of the Constitution.’ Abeokuta High Court must tell us
if Aishat Abdul-Aleem is not a female Muslim.
“The landmark declaration of the Court of Appeal in Lagos State
v Miss Ashiat Abdkareem CA/L/135/15 still remains unchallenged. In
his lead judgment, Justice Gumel held that the use of hijab was an
Islamic injunction and also an act of worship hence it would
constitute a violation of the appellants’ rights to stop them from
wearing the hijab in public schools.
“MURIC considers the Abeokuta judgement an extension of the
persecution of Muslims in Yorubaland to the judicial terrain. The
honourable justice has simply returned Ogun State to the Stone Age.
By ruling that minors are not covered in fundamental human right to
use hijab, the court has denied Muslim parents the opportunity to
train their children in the use of hijab from childhood.
“The Abeokuta ruling is another example of the persecution of
Muslims in Yorubaland. It is only in Yorubaland that Muslims must
approach the courts before they can secure their Allah-given
fundamental human rights. It is only in Yorubaland that Muslims
suffer psychological trauma on account of the persecution and
humiliation that their children go through in the schools.
“Yet some extremist irredentists want Yoruba Muslims to support
them in a secessionist move to create Oduduwa Republic from the
present Nigeria. They want to take us from the frying pan into the
fire. How can a child whose step-mother has always maltreated him
agree to leave his father in order to follow the same wicked
step-mother after a divorce?
“Yoruba Muslims are not getting the dividends of democracy in
Yorubaland. They are treated like underdogs. But instead of taking
to violence they head to the courts. Even then they are not getting
justice in the courts. It is getting to boiling point and we are
hoping that Yoruba Muslims will not put their backs to the wall
very soon. We appeal to Muslims in Yorubaland in particular and
Nigeria in general to remain calm. It may be a long road but we
will get there one day. Nonetheless, the road must not be painted
in red.”
The Muslim Rights Concern has reacted to the judgment of Justice
Bamgbose Alabi of an Abeokuta High Court in Ogun State who ruled
that “the use of hijab is considered a fundamental human right only
for adults”.
This formed the basis of his judgement on June 4, 2020 in a case
filed by Aishat Abdul-Aleem, an 11-year-old Muslim girl who was
sent out of school at the Gateway Secondary School, Abeokuta in
December 2018.
In its reaction to this judgement, MURIC described the judgement
as judicial namby-pamby.
MURIC’s reaction was contained in a press statement issued by
the Director of the organization, Prof. Ishaq Akintola, on
Monday.
MURIC said: “We reject this judgement in its totality. What
manner of judicial declaration is this? Is the judge telling us
that minors have no religion, no fundamental human rights, not even
a dot in social statistics? Is he telling us that minors do not
exist? Why are minors counted during census? Why do we register
them at birth? Is the killing of a minor judiciable or not? This
judgment suffers from desertification of a human face. It has no
soul. It is judicial namby-pamby.
“The ruling stands in contra-distinction to Section 38 (2) of
the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria which
states inter alia, ‘No person attending any place of education
shall be required … to take part in …ceremony or observance (which)
relates to a religion other than his own or a religion not approved
by his parent or guardian’.
“The above section has clearly and convincingly recognized the
right of minors to enjoy fundamental human rights. It also placed
them under the umbrella of their parents’ or guardians’ inalienable
rights.
“By this arbitrary judgement, the judge has elected to
discriminate against children on account of age. This is contrary
to Article 2 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. What
will happen if a case of rape of a minor is brought to this court?
Can minors ever get redress in this court? Do minors even exist as
far as this court is concerned?
“The judgement in the case of Aishat Abdul-Aleem is a judicial
somersault. It is as arbitrary as it is absurd. It is equally an
unprecedented miscarriage of justice. It cannot hold any water. We
charge the litigants to approach an appellate court without
delay.
“Previous judgements in hijab cases have set precedents which
this judge has chosen to ignore. In the case of Abidemi Rasaq &
3Ors Vs Commissioner for Health Lagos State & 2 Ors, Suit No.
ID/424M/2004, the Lagos High Court declared unconstitutional a
circular issued by Lagos School of Health Technology banning the
students from wearing hijab.
“Also in the case of Provost Kwara State College of Education,
Ilorin vs Basirat Saliu Suit No. CA/IL/49/2009, the Court of
Appeal, Ilorin Judicial Division held thus: ‘The use of veil
(hijab) by female Muslims qualifies as a fundamental right under
section 38 of the Constitution.’ Abeokuta High Court must tell us
if Aishat Abdul-Aleem is not a female Muslim.
“The landmark declaration of the Court of Appeal in Lagos State
v Miss Ashiat Abdkareem CA/L/135/15 still remains unchallenged. In
his lead judgment, Justice Gumel held that the use of hijab was an
Islamic injunction and also an act of worship hence it would
constitute a violation of the appellants’ rights to stop them from
wearing the hijab in public schools.
“MURIC considers the Abeokuta judgement an extension of the
persecution of Muslims in Yorubaland to the judicial terrain. The
honourable justice has simply returned Ogun State to the Stone Age.
By ruling that minors are not covered in fundamental human right to
use hijab, the court has denied Muslim parents the opportunity to
train their children in the use of hijab from childhood.
“The Abeokuta ruling is another example of the persecution of
Muslims in Yorubaland. It is only in Yorubaland that Muslims must
approach the courts before they can secure their Allah-given
fundamental human rights. It is only in Yorubaland that Muslims
suffer psychological trauma on account of the persecution and
humiliation that their children go through in the schools.
“Yet some extremist irredentists want Yoruba Muslims to support
them in a secessionist move to create Oduduwa Republic from the
present Nigeria. They want to take us from the frying pan into the
fire. How can a child whose step-mother has always maltreated him
agree to leave his father in order to follow the same wicked
step-mother after a divorce?
“Yoruba Muslims are not getting the dividends of democracy in
Yorubaland. They are treated like underdogs. But instead of taking
to violence they head to the courts. Even then they are not getting
justice in the courts. It is getting to boiling point and we are
hoping that Yoruba Muslims will not put their backs to the wall
very soon. We appeal to Muslims in Yorubaland in particular and
Nigeria in general to remain calm. It may be a long road but we
will get there one day. Nonetheless, the road must not be painted
in red.”