Before
the advent of the British to the area now known as Nigeria, there were
different systems for the administration of criminal law. In the Southern part
of Nigeria, the criminal justice system was administered using the local
traditions of the society. In most parts of the North, the criminal justice
system was regulated by the operation of Islamic law.
In the year 1861, King Dosunmu of Lagos ceded Lagos to British control
and Lagos became a crown colony. Consequently, in the year 1863,
the British introduced the criminal justice system which was applied in Britain
to Lagos. In the protectorates, the indigenous laws were still applicable.
In 1904, after consolidating
their hold over the North, the British introduced the Criminal
Code. In the year 1914, the Northern and
Southern protectorates were merged. This resulted in a situation in which three
Criminal justice systems were in operation throughout the country: the English
criminal law in Lagos, the Criminal Code in the
North and the indigenous criminal law customs in the south.
To resolve this, the British decided to make the provisions
of the Criminal Code applicable to the whole
of Nigeria in the year 1916.
This caused a lot of conflict especially between the Criminal
Code and the Islamic Law. One of the major areas of
contention was the fact that Islamic law allowed the infliction of punishment
unrecognized by the Criminal Code. Islamic
law also didn’t recognise provocation in order to mitigate a sentence of death
to manslaughter.
In an attempt to resolve this conflict, S.4
of the Criminal Code was amended. The section initially
read thus:
“No person shall be liable to
be tried or punished in any court in Nigeria, other than a native tribunal, for
any offence except under the express provision of the code or some other
ordinance or some law or some order-in-council made by his majesty for
Nigeria.”
The amendment removed the phrase “other than a native
tribunal” from S.4 of the Criminal Code.
This was thought in many quarters to remove the powers of the native courts .
However, the criminal jurisdiction of the native courts was saved by the
provisions of S.10 of the Native
Court Ordinance 1933.
The case that further clarified all ambiguity on the issue
was that of Gubba vs Gwandu Native Authority (1947)
WACA vol 12.
In this case, the appellant was sentenced to death for murder by an Alkali’s
Court. However, the appellant had a defense of provocation but it was not
considered by the Alkali’s court because provocation wasn’t recognized under
Islamic law. If the Alkali’s court had applied the Criminal
Code, the death sentence would have been mitigated to the
sentence for manslaughter.
On appeal, the West African Court of Appeal quashed the
decision of the lower court. It held that customary courts could only fully
apply customary law in cases which are not covered under the Criminal Code. If
the cases are covered by the criminal code, customary law could not be applied.
This judgement caused a lot of discontent amongst the Muslim
community as Islamic law was being relegated to the background. This was due to
the fact that the criminal code covered most aspects of criminal law. To solve
this issue, a committee was set up.
The committee proposed that a Customary Court trying a
criminal case had the right to try and and sentence the case under the
customary law without paying regard to the provisions of the Criminal
Code. This was applied by the courts in cases like Kano
Native Authority vs Fagoji (1957) NRNLR and Tsamiya
vs Bauchi Native Authority (1957) NRNLR.
The principles followed in the above cases were however
truncated in the case of Maizabo vs Sokoto Native Authority (1957). In
this case, the court held that:
Though a Native Court has power to try a case under Native
law and custom, it cannot impose a higher sentence than the accused would have
gotten had his case been tried under the Criminal Code.
This meant that the case could be tried under the Customary
Law but for sentencing, recourse had to be made to the Criminal
Code.
This further caused more conflict in the Northern region. To
resolve this, a committee was set up in 1958 to address the issue. The
committee proposed either the whole acceptance of English Criminal Law, the
whole acceptance of Islamic Law or a Hybrid between both of them.
After heated debates and extensive consultation, it was
decided that a hybrid was the best choice. This was brought into effect through
the introduction of the Penal Code. This was
considered because it was already been applied successfully in a Muslim
community (Sudan). The Penal Code was also
modeled after the Indian Penal Code of 1860.
The Penal Code contained some elements of Islamic law
through the criminalisation of certain acts like Adultery; SS.387
and 388, Drinking of Alcohol; s.403, insulting the
modesty of Muslim Women; s.400. The code also
preserved the punishment of hard lashing; s.68(2).
Thus, Customary Criminal Law is no more applicable in the
north due to the provision of S.3(2) of the Penal Code.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Leave your comment below