The Kano State Government has firmly rejected the recent ruling issued by the ECOWAS Court of Justice, which declared that portions of the state’s blasphemy laws violate fundamental human rights. In a bold response, the government argued that it has a constitutional mandate to enact laws aligned with the moral and religious values of its predominantly Muslim population.
ECOWAS Court Rules Against Kano’s Penal Codes
On April 9, the ECOWAS Court ruled that several sections of the Kano State Sharia Penal Code Law and the Kano State Penal Code conflict with regional and international standards protecting freedom of expression. Citing Article 9(2) of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, the court ordered Nigeria’s federal government to either repeal or amend the laws to ensure compliance with international obligations.
Kano Defends Its Legislative Authority
In response, the Kano State Commissioner for Information and Internal Affairs, Ibrahim Garba Waiya, issued a statement on Sunday dismissing the ECOWAS Court’s ruling. Waiya asserted that Nigeria’s constitution grants sub-national governments the authority to legislate on matters that reflect their social, religious, and moral values. He argued that allowing an external court to override state-level legislation undermines the federal structure enshrined in the Nigerian Constitution.
Constitutional Backing for State-Level Legislation
Quoting Section 4(7) of the 1999 Constitution, Waiya emphasized that state houses of assembly possess the power to legislate on issues within the concurrent legislative list, including criminal justice. He pointed out that the Kano Sharia Penal Code, which came into effect in 2000, was passed with full legislative backing and received broad public support. According to him, this legal framework reflects the will and values of Kano’s citizens, not an imposition by any central authority.
“This is not a constitutional deviation but rather a demonstration of legal pluralism, which is a cornerstone of Nigeria’s federalism,” the statement clarified. “States have every right to mirror their religious and cultural realities in legislation, a principle reinforced by numerous legal precedents.”
Citing International Precedents
To bolster its stance, the Kano State Government referenced historical legal decisions outside Nigeria. The statement cited the 1996 ruling in Wingrove v. United Kingdom, in which the European Court of Human Rights upheld the United Kingdom’s blasphemy laws at the time. This, Kano argued, reinforces the legitimacy of blasphemy legislation when crafted in response to the sensitivities of a religious community.
Religious Sanctity Must Be Protected
Kano’s government further stated that protecting the sanctity of the Prophet Muhammad (SAW) remains a non-negotiable duty. The government declared that defamation or mockery of sacred religious figures constitutes an attack on the core beliefs of its residents. It warned that religious freedom should not be misused as a shield for provocative acts that threaten societal harmony.
Blasphemy Prosecutions Under Careful Oversight
While acknowledging concerns about the misuse of blasphemy laws, the state insisted that all prosecutions undergo rigorous oversight. Each case must receive approval from the state’s Attorney General, who ensures due process. Kano officials stressed that the state carefully balances its commitment to justice with the need to preserve public order and religious dignity.
“We will not allow anyone to exploit religious freedom to justify blasphemy, insults, or provocation,” the statement read. “Kano stands at a crucial juncture—upholding its international obligations while fiercely protecting its spiritual and moral foundation.”
State Warns Against Foreign Interference
Finally, Kano authorities issued a stern warning to the international community, cautioning against what they described as “external interference” in domestic legal matters. While reaffirming their respect for fundamental human rights and the rule of law, the state’s leadership insisted that no foreign ruling should override the deeply rooted religious values of its people.
“We reject any decision that seeks to dilute our moral principles or distort the constitutional roles granted to Nigerian states,” the government declared.
Ongoing Debate Reflects Nigeria’s Legal Complexity
This clash between Kano State and the ECOWAS Court underscores the broader tension between international human rights frameworks and locally defined laws rooted in religion and culture. As Nigeria continues to navigate its complex legal landscape, the debate over blasphemy laws reveals the delicate balance between upholding international commitments and respecting the diverse values of its constituent states.
Kano’s resistance to the ECOWAS ruling signals a continued commitment to religious-based governance, even as the pressure to reform grows. Moving forward, this case could shape not only Nigeria’s domestic legal discourse but also its relationship with regional legal institutions. Whether compromise or confrontation lies ahead remains to be seen.
