This presenter has deliberately changed the title Nigeria any Hope for an Industrial Revolution to There is Hope for an Industrial Revolution in Nigeria to reflect a positive state of mind about Nigeria. However this would depend on the immediate ending of the ideological war – i.e. between Liberal Democracy and Sharia now going on in Nigeria.

Ideology is “a set of ideals that an economic and political system is based on” and where there is an ideological war, the economy stagnates. In such a situation there cannot be an industrial revolution. Ideology encompasses history, politics, religion, culture statecraft and law. Before the amalgamation of 1914, Northern Nigeria was described as Muslim North and Southern Nigeria as Christian South and till date no identifiable attempt has been made or is being made for Nigeria to have one not two ideologies -Liberal Democracy that was agreed upon at independence .

Liberal defined as “allowing freedom to others, not controlling others” is further defined as the “theory or system of government by freely elected representatives of the people; the right to fair government, free election of representatives and equality in voting.” [David Robertson the Penguin Dictionary of Politics Page 84]. Liberal also means “the willingness to understand other people’s behaviours, opinion etc especially when they are different from your own”, “wanting or allowing a lot of political and economic freedom and supporting gradual social, political or religious change” [Oxford Advanced Learners Dictionary]. A system of government in which all the people of a country can vote to elect their representatives, parliamentary democracy”. Fortunately Nigeria through the British became a signatory to the United Nations charter on Human Rights and became the first country in the world to include its provisions in her Constitution.

Liberal Democracy
A combination of two values, Liberal Democracy with Human Rights in our Constitutions of 1960 and 1963 provided for us a democratic Constitution, unfortunately the Constitutions of 1979 and 1999 contain a large measure of provisos that whittled down liberal democracy to create space for Sharia. The question is, where does Nigeria stand, Liberal Democracy or Sharia? The practice of our democracy suggests that Sharia is the dominant ideology operated and enforced by an “invisible government” that restraints our practice of liberal democracy. This unseen hand makes democracy difficult to practise in Nigeria by weakening democratic institutions. More will be said about this assertion.

Some Muslim scholars explained that there is not a single definition of the term “Ash-shari'a that, on the basis of the root of the word, means 'the way' (the path leading to the source') and outlines a global conception of creation, existence, death, and the way of life it entails, stemming from a normative reading and an understanding of scriptural sources. It determines 'how to be a Muslim. ‘Ash-shari'a’ for ... jurists, is the corpus of general principles of Islamic law extracted from its two fundamental sources (the Qur'an and the Sunnah). The term 'Shari'a' occurs just once in the Qur'an. The phrase 'Islamic law' is often used interchangeably with the Shari'a, and while this usage has its critics, others defend the equation.” An important related concept is fiqh, which literally means comprehension or understanding. Fiqh is the body of reasoned reflection and opinion of Islamic scholars and jurists-as well as the science or method of deducing such opinions-concerning what they consider the Shari'a require of Muslims in the particular time and locality they find themselves. Fiqh, in other words, is the developing jurisprudence of the Shari'a.”
[Shari’a in the West edited by Rex Ahdar & Nicholas Aroney page 4]

Sharia as Law
Elements of Sharia law have been implemented in Kano and other northern kingdoms for five hundred years. The famous Fulani founder of the Sokoto Caliphate, Usman dan Fodio [1754-1817], waged jihad against rulers faulted for failing to enforce the Sharia. In the years since, political crises in the northern states have regularly given rise to movements of religious purification and reform (tajdid). All decry the corruption of the existing socio-political order and see a more comprehensive observance of Islamic law as the solution. As Lubeck notes, the discourse of tajdid (Ar, “restoration,” “revival”, as of authentic Islamic teachings) is so deeply inscribed in northern political culture that social crises still give rise today to reform movements of Islamic law that gained momentum after 1999. He identifies several reasons. In 1999, civilian rule was restored after sixteen years of authoritarian rule by corrupt generals, most of whom hailed from the Muslim North. The newly elected president then, Obasanjo, was a born-again Christian from Nigeria’s Yoruba-speaking southwest. Although the return to civilian rule was welcomed in civil society and Christian circles, it caused anxiety among the long-dominant Northern elite.

Sharia as an ideology
The final decades of the twentieth century was a period of the resurgence in religious piety and renewed religion vitality in the Muslim world. Hefner wrote, “The Islamic resurgence also gave rise to a more politically ambiguous development that called for the state to apply a uniform and codified revision of Sharia, or Islamic Law to all Muslim citizens”. [Shari’a Politics: Islamic Law and Society in the Modern World Robert W. Hefner page 1]. An-Na’im observed “it is clear that there is no uniform and settled understanding of Shari'a among Muslims that can be enforced by the state. This is true even within the same school of Sunni or Shi'a jurisprudence, let alone across different schools and sects. It should be emphasized at this level that since every understanding of Shari'a, even if universal among Muslims, is a human interpretation, none should be enforced as state law in the name of Shari'a or Islam as such. At another level, because Shari'a is always the product of human interpretation of divine sources, any interpretation of it will reflect the human limitations of those who are interpreting it, despite the divinity of the sources they are working with. From this perspective Shari'a will always remain open to reinterpretation and evolution, in response to the constantly changing needs of Islamic societies and communities in different times and places.” [Shari’a in the West edited by Rex Ahdar & Nicholas Aroney pages 3 - 4].

In Nigeria today, the demand for Sharia law is being voiced by armed militant Boko Haram carrying out criminal acts of violence to get their way. It is therefore not correct to say that Boko Haram insurgency is not religious.

The Two races in Nigeria
Liberal Democracy was accepted by Nigerian leaders without a single dissension at all the Constitutional Conferences that took place preceding independence. A few years after independence and as a result of the struggle for power, another ideology Sharia came into existence, introduced by the adherents of Islam. The racial divide in Nigeria is a factor in crystallizing dual ideology. Karl Maier in his book This House has Fallen, Nigeria in Crisis” wrote:
“In the north the main ethnic groups-the Hausas, the Fulanis, and Kanuri-were linked culturally, religiously, and economically to North Africa, particularly after the Arabs conquered the Berbers in the seventh century. The Arabs brought Islam, as well as transportation-the camel, writing and mathematics skills that greatly eased communication and administration across vast territories. The first major state within the future frontiers of Nigeria, and the initial landing point of Islam, was Kanem-Borno, in far northeast near Lake Chad. In the northwest were the ancient Hausa city-states, such as Kano, believed to be one thousand years old. In the early 1800s these city-states fell under the control of the Sokoto Caliphate, a vast centralized Islamic state established by a jihad, or holy war, led by the Fulanis, whose generations before had emigrated from the Senegal River valley. On the margins of the caliphate a myriad of pagan ethnic groups lived in scattered farming and iron-working communities on the Jos plateau in what later became known as the middle belt. Although these tiny groups were overshadowed by the political sophistication of their Muslim neighbors and were the victims of their slave raids, some of them produced the terra-cotta figures that many experts regard as great artistic works, works that were almost certainly predecessors to the Yoruba art of Ife and the Benin bronzes. The Nok culture, named after the village where the first terra-cottas were found, flourished between 500 B.C and A.D. 200. [Page 8]

It can be said that Nigeria has two distinct races, the Africans, blacks or negro and the Arabs. This distinction is being made not to reduce the Nigerianess of some Nigerians as the Constitution has defined who is a Nigerian, rather it is intended to trace the route of dual ideology.

The British first colonized Lagos then the Southern Provinces which constituted the country of Southern Nigeria. The British later conquered the Northern Provinces which constituted Northern Nigeria as another country. The two Nigerias were amalgamated in 1914. Denis Judd in his book Empire: The British Imperial Experience from 1965 to the Present wrote:
“There was certainly continuity, however, in one crucial area of imperial overlordship: the need to seek out, negotiate with and, in the last resort, control collaborationist groups within the Empire. This meant different things in different contexts. In India it meant leaving" a third of the country in the hands of local princes; in Northern Nigeria it meant the establishment of a system of 'indirect rule', whereby the British collaborated with the Muslim emirs; sometimes it meant backing one tribe or faction against another, as in the support of anti-Mahdist elements in the Sudan, or occasionally profiting from any friction between the Masai, the Luo and the Kikuyu in Kenya.” [Page 238]

Rulership in Nigeria
Nigeria has remained trapped in a time warp. It has not succeeded in extricating itself from the colonial trap that is suffused with inherited prejudices, and distorted social histories. History has continued to serve as a platform for the re-enforcement and concretization of age-old regional, ethnic and religious prejudices. The result is that in politics, economics, education, academia, religion and every area of our national life, these prejudices continue to dog and shape the choices we make in our relationships. Federal character, zoning are examples of these prejudice.

Regionalism, religious affiliation, race and ethnicity still weigh heavily as determinants in the choices and appointments of political officers and of even Imams of various Mosques and Bishops in the various Christian Churches in Nigeria. Trade unions, women organizations and politicians are all wrestling with these problems. The result is that the nation lives under the weight of wanting to be part of the oligarchy.

These time-based tactics of divide and rule that was at the heart of British colonialism was copied by our military leaders. The military in Nigeria who subverted democracy institutionalized their own rule (Sharia) using basically the same tactics that the British used. They took advantage of the worst primordial fears of various communities, sowed further anxiety by skewed policy choices, and thus compounded an already vulnerable situation. They also introduced the concept of working from pre-set answers.

By the end of military rule, the nation was left with a severely wounded community that saw some of its best brains decimated by firing squads, imprisonment, early retirements, jealousy, and a loss of mission and focus. Institutional chaos has produced selfishness and greed. The result is that Nigeria is a country but not a nation, after 100 years of amalgamation.

Instrument of Subjugation
In reflecting on the legacies of post colonialism, it is significant to note that although there has been the temptation to equate it with the military, the fact is that whether in or out of uniform, the behavioral patterns of dictatorships all over the world are the same at least in terms of intent. What is central is the fact that they govern an unwilling citizenry and then deploy all resources to compel compliance or devise atrocious means of containing what is perceived as the opposition. In Nigeria a religious colouration – Sharia was included as a pretext to effect change.

Major AL-Mustapha Chief Security officer to Abacha composed the following oath different from what is contained in the Constitution to which all members of the security outfits had to swear. Titled, Oath Pledge for Security People, it reads as follows:
“We are staff of the security department, the salt of our nation in defence of General Abacha HOS, C-in-C of the Armed Forces, Federal Republic of Nigeria. Readily Available at all times, disciplined we stand. So help me God.”
[Witness to Justice Bishop Hassan Kukah page 32]
Not in defence of Nigeria but an individual.

Another military man Major Okuntimo’s of the Internal Security Task Force ran amok in Ogoniland raiding some sixty towns and villages between May and July. At least fifty Ogonis were executed. Human Rights Watch/Africa described the pattern in the following terms.
“Troops entered towns and villages shooting at random, as villagers fled to the surrounding bush. Soldiers and mobile police stormed houses, breaking down doors and windows with their boots, the butts of their guns, and machetes. Villages who crossed their paths, including children and the elderly, were severely beaten, forced to pay “settlement fees” [bribes], and sometimes shot. Many women were raped……Before leaving, troops looted money, food, livestock, and other property. --- Okuntimo said in a in a press conference “I operated in the night. Nobody knew where I was coming from. What I will just do is that I will take some detachments of soldiers, they will just stay at the four corners of the town. They …….. have automatic rifles that sound death. If you hear the sound you will freeze. And then I will equally choose about twenty (soldiers) and give them….grenades-explosives-very hard ones. So we will surround the town at night….The machine with five hundred rounds will open up. When four or five like that open up and then we are throwing grenades and they are making “eekpuwaa!” what do you think the ….. and they know I am around, what do you think the people are going to do? And we have already put roadblocks on the main road, we don’t want anybody to start running….so that option we made was that we should drive all these boys, all these people into the bush with nothing except the pants and the wrapper they are using that night. [Karl Maier This House has Fallen, Nigeria in Crisis page 106]

There was frustration in the military and the issue of who really was in control was not in dispute as the ideology of Sharia reigned supreme. Evidently, with their energies concentrated on rent seeking, wealth appropriation and unbridled quest for power, the generals, wrestling for power, abandoned the military as an institution, thus justifying the truism that no man can serve two masters. No two contradictory ideologies can jointly direct a nation to prosperity including industrial revolution. In the Abacha era, the military did throw up its last dregs. In which case, more than anything else, it is hoped that their performance is a clear demonstration that the military has nothing left to offer Nigeria in terms of leadership. Military rule in Nigeria with benefit of hindsight was a curse not a blessing.

The Promotion of Sharia
In 1960 the Nigerian delegation to all constitutional conferences accepted Liberal Democracy as the country’s ideology and a constitution was written on the basis of Liberal Democracy. Willink wrote:
“the whole structure of the proceedings leading to independence is based on the belief that Nigeria means to follow the road of liberal democracy and parliamentary government.”

Michael Vickers in his book A Nation Betrayed: Nigeria and the Minorities Commission of 1957 wrote:
“Each Regional Government was determined to entrench the position and power of the dominant ethnic group in its respective Region. Indeed in this there was a substantial irony. Custom and usage had rendered the British-created Administrative structure as the sole structure acceptable to Nigeria's leaders as the template for the country's envisaged Independence 'political frame: Furthermore, as Nigeria's leaders rejected out of hand adoption of any African or indigenous constitutional model, it was the foreign Westminster Model that was unanimously favored.” [Page 266]
Northern leaders accepted Liberal Democracy but it would appear that they had preference for Sharia based on the findings of Willink’s Commission. They preferred “a system of rule and of society of which an important ingredient is the operation of Muslim law” – Sharia, Willink wrote
“Many witnesses have referred to their fears of Fulani-Hausa domination, and though the meaning of this phrase was not always expressed in terms, or even consciously analyzed by those who used it, it clearly implies a system of rule and of society of which an important ingredient is the operation of Muslim Law. Some witnesses have specifically referred to this system of law as an object of fear. --- These fears are in the main of two kinds. There are those arising from the fact that Muslim Law makes a distinction between Muslims and non-­Muslims, and there is also a group of fears based on the belief that the judiciary is at present closely associated with the executive and that in the future this association may become closer.” [Report of the Commission appointed to enquire into the fears of Minorities and the means of allaying them Page 66]

Maitatsine Enquiry
No more was heard of Sharia until the 1977 Constitutional Conference when Northern delegates led by Shehu Shagari walked out over the issue of Sharia. Thereafter the Maitatsine Enquiry was constituted following a disturbance that was caused by differences between some Islamic sects and it became a new platform. Suddenly, Muslim leaders started using the occasion to demand for Sharia. The evidence of Muslim Students’ Society (MSS) is reproduced below:
“On 29th September, 1980, M.S.S. Students in ABU destroyed many alcoholic drinks at a kiosk on the campus. The most militant of the M.S.S. members would appear to be its Deputy Chairman, Ibrahim El-Zakzaky, who was expelled from ABU Zaria on 14th December, 1979, for his role in fomenting M.S.S. unrest on the campus. EI-Zakzaky was the brain behind a demonstration in Zaria by M.S.S. members on 4th May, 1980, when ten bus-loads of the members drove round the city with the following inscriptions in the buses :- (a) 'Down with the Nigerian Constitution; and {b) 'Islam only.' On 20th August, 1980, El-Zakzaky was reported to be circulating in the Northern States, pamphlets captioned, "Fadakarwa ga Musulmin Nigeria" (Calling on Moslems in Nigeria") in which he condemned the Nigerian Constitution for being anti-Islamic, called for an Islamic revolution, and urged Islamic students to rise against the Federal Government. He also demanded the recognition of the Sharia Law. EI-Zakzaky is reported to have visited on several occasions, and he recently returned from Iran where he was said to have received training in planning and executing students' unrest.”
[Report of Tribunal of Inquiry on Kano Disturbances (paragraphs 334(ix)) pages 87 - 88]

Aniagolu JSC in his findings wrote:
“the issue, as pointed out by the Tribunal, was not whether the doctrinal content of Islam could permit of any variation and still be regarded as Islam, but whether any person who harbours a different view would be allowed to propagate his different view and win proselytes for his new creed under the Constitution. It has, however, to be conceded that circumstances may exist in which if the person who harbours the different view goes to a community which predominantly professes the faith which he condemns, and especially so in abusive terms, he may be guilty of conduct likely to cause a breach of the peace and must, in the circumstances, be prevented from exciting and inciting, members of the said community to violence.”
[Report of Tribunal of Inquiry on Kano Disturbances (paragraphs 319) page 84]

“On the other side are traceable such factors as rigid adherence to the dogmatic tenets of Islam in what we may describe as the strict Islamic Conformist group, very learned and constituting the elite but uncompromisingly resentful of any introductions into Islam of "new ways" ; impatient of what they describe as “ignorance" and, like the opposing side completely intolerant-a single devastating attitude of mind that we found permeating the whole gamut of the religious conflict in this part of the country. Indeed Alhaji Nariwu Kabara (w. 48) head of the Quadiriyya group, stated in evidence before us that so long as one group insists on describing the others whom they do not approve of as non-Muslims, so long shall there be disharmony.
[Report of Tribunal of Inquiry on Kano Disturbances (paragraphs 335) page 89]
This Tribunal found it difficult as the Report states
“to get this category of Religious leaders to concede that, under our constitution, a man may practice any religion of his choice in whole or modified form or even an entirely new creation of his own so long as in doing so he does not profane or condemn or ridicule other people's doctrine by means of public speeches or the use of cassettes. That so long as he does not use abusive words or in any way employ compulsion, blackmail or threats in converting followers to his side our Constitution guarantees him the freedom to so worship.”
[Report of Tribunal of Inquiry on Kano Disturbances (paragraphs 336 - 339) page 89]

Boko Haram in 2014 threatens that the Chibok girls, a majority of whom are Christians, must convert to Islam or be sold into slavery.

The Tribunal then made these findings:
“all of them without exception, whilst recognizing the freedom of religion guaranteed by our Constitution in Section 35, nonetheless insist that, by reason of Section 41, such freedom cannot be absolute but should be subject to some constraints. Section 41 (I) states inter-alia- “Nothing in Sections 34,35,36,37 and 38 of this Constitution shall invalidate any law that is reasonably justifiable in a democratic society - (a) in the interest of defence, public safety, public order, public morality or public Health. They further argued-Professor Galadanci (w.52)- Alhaji Ibrahim Dasuki (w.39) and Mr. Alhaji M. Gumi (W. 40)- that although the Constitution allows a man to practice whatever religion he chooses, this presupposes also an acceptance of the existence of certain universal but immutable tenets of religion practiced by the majority, particularly in the Islamic faith. That indeed the proponents of changes, innovations or variations must treat those principles with reverence and not desecrate them by either introducing wrong interpretations or additions 'nor by the creation of new "Prophets of their own." If they do any of these things which offend against the religious susceptibilities of the majority, Professor Galadanci stated bluntly that "they should be stopped by Government or the Law enforcement agencies.”

The impression the presenter had as one of the counsel at this Inquiry was that the disturbance was between Muslim sects, on the proper interpretation of the Quran and resources for their sects. When Shagari’s government was overthrown some months after, and security votes were used indirectly through the traditional rulers to build Mosques and pay imams. The traditional rulers and imams became indirectly agents of the military government. It became very clear that Nigerian Muslim Organizations were heavily influenced by the Egyptian Brotherhood. Shagari wrote:
“Muhammad Carpenter was Nigeria’s Ambassador to Italy at the time the coup took place at the end of the year 1983. He said that during that year he was able to gather very authentic information about some suspicious movements by some highly placed Nigerians who had been passing through Rome from London en route to Egypt and one or two Balkan countries. Most of these travelers who were frequently in transit at Da Vinci Airport, Rome were senior military officers, serving and retired, together with a well-known Nigerian business tycoon. Ambassador Carpenter, with the help of his security agents, was able to trace their destinations as well as the purpose of their journeys eastwards. He gathered that these people were planning a coup against his government. Towards this end, they had chosen the Egyptian style of military coup in which the plotters used General Mohammed Neguib as a scapegoat to achieve their ends. He alleged that these conspirators had carefully studied Colonel Abdel Nasser's style of military coup and military rule and were determined to implement same in Nigeria. He gave me the names of those involved but regretted that he was unable to do this at the right time because he could not trust anyone except himself to convey this information direct to me. Unfortunately, however, the military struck before he could find an excuse to come home to Nigeria and report the matter to me.”
[Shehu Shagari: Beckon to Serve page 470]

After the Report of the Aniagolu’s Tribunal was released, the military government that followed, succeeded in uniting all Muslim groups in the country, the Sunnis, the Shittes, the Ahmadiyas, the Izala every group, especially when some Muslims and military men began the “romance” with the “Islamic Brotherhood” of Egypt as shown below.
There was the brutal rule by Generals Ibrahim Babangida and Sani Abacha but the transition to civil rule in 1999 ended years of human rights abuse. Most Nigerians at that time held them both responsible for destroying public institutions and the international reputation of Nigeria. It was during Babangida’s regime that Dele Giwa was murdered with a parcel bomb. Abacha’s policies caused the death of Shehu Yar’Adua and the hanging of Ken Saro-Wiwa for demanding resource control. The victory of Olusegun Obasanjo terminated the long-standing political arrangement that gave the North, political control of the Federal Government. Power shift to the South provoked insecurity in the country contrived by Sharia. Sani Ahmed the Governor of Zamfara State introduced Sharia which was considered as a radical departure from Northern politicians preferences for constructing multi-ethnic coalitions to hold federal power and control the distribution of petrol money law into Zamfara State. The Zamfara introduction of Sharia spread like wild fire. Paul M. Lubeck wrote: “it was spearheaded by committees of the pious, ulama, professionals, students, and Islamic civil society groups who used demonstrations, public marches, zealous vigilantes, and numerous petitions to demand that states immediately implement Sharia criminal law without compromise or delay.”[1] The Sharia law was thereafter adopted by eleven other states of the North while Nigeria’s legal system remained largely the same with Sharia judges adjudicating personal and family law. The Sharia reform was powered by neo-Salafists. Some Sharia writers contended that the Sharia movement arose as a result of “decades of political and economic mismanagement by military and civilian rulers which rendered Sharia an attractive political alternative for Nigeria’s northern Muslims. At the heart of Nigeria’s crisis of governance lies the resource curse, or the “paradox of riches.” Nigeria’s extraordinary natural resources stand in sharp contrast to its abysmal failure to realize even a tiny portion of its obvious potential”.[2] This no doubt accounts for poor governance, academic corruption, indifference to common good, cyclical communal conflict and the woeful failure to harness Nigeria resources to organize, develop and regulate a nation out of the many tribes, notwithstanding the amount of material resources available to Nigeria. The result is that Nigeria is ruled by what is described as “a multi-layered institutionalized oligarchy composed of self-serving politicians, businessmen, “politics fixers”, “godfathers”, military generals and elite who share the common interest of controlling the “petro dollar”, under the ideology of Sharia.

The Genesis of Muslim Brotherhood
The defeat of the Ottoman Empire and its allies led to the Empire’s dissolution as a unified entity in July 1923 and the establishment of the modern state of Turkey by Mustapha Kemal, who was given the title “Ataturk” or “Father of the Turks.” Determined to tie his country firmly to the West, Ataturk sought to diminish Turkey’s Islamic character, notably by abolishing the caliphate in favor of secular rule. Kemal also banned the growing of beards by men and wearing of hijab by women. He banned as well, the call to prayer by muezzins; abolished the Turkish language’s script, replaced it with Latin script and made the Turkish military the custodian of secular tradition. This also explains why some Muslims in Nigeria see the Nigerian forces as custodians of democracy. The dissolution of the caliphate and the transformation of Turkey from the center of the Islamic world to a secular nation did not sit well with some in the global Islamic community (ummah). One of those determined to restore the caliphate was Hassan al Banna, the son of a Muslim imam who lived outside of Cairo, Egypt. In 1928, he founded an organization known as the al-Ikhwan al-Muslimin, the Society of Muslim Brothers or the Muslim Brotherhood (MB), with the sole aim of unifying the Islamic states under a new caliphate and subordinating all lands to the Caliph’s rule pursuant to Sharia with Sharia as the source of all legislation. The Muslim Brotherhood’s byelaws make this very clear. The Muslim Brotherhood is an International Muslim body which seeks to establish Allah’s law in the land by achieving the spiritual goals of Islam. Its objectives include the need to work on establishing the Islamic State and the sincere support for a global cooperation in accordance with the provisions of the Islamic Sharia. The Muslim Brotherhood in achieving these objectives make every effort for the establishment of educational, social, economic, and scientific institutions and the establishment of mosques, schools, clinics, shelters, clubs, as well as the formation of committees to regulate zakat affairs and alms. Also, the Islamic nation must be fully prepared to fight the tyrants and the enemies of Allah as a prelude to establishing the Islamic state. Muslim Brotherhood had a very strong influence in Nigeria and the British knew it and that was why they sent Gumi to Ruda College in Khartoum in 1954-55 rather than Al-Azhar in Cairo.
Paul M. Lubeck wrote:
Responsibility for the construction of the Muslim public sphere fell instead upon the shoulders of the northern nationalist leaders and their advisors. These men had been educated in elite English-language schools like Katsina College, hybrid but essentially modern institutions, which had been established by the colonial state to rationalize indirect rule and create an educated administrative class. Educated in Western as well as Islamic learning, the Muslim nationalist leaders struggled among themselves, as well as with the British and southern nationalists, over the questions of how to balance national and regional powers, the position of non-Muslims in the Northern Region's government, and the role that shari'a would play in the embryonic Nigerian politics.
[Shari’a Politics: Islamic Law and Society in the Modern World page 260]
Shagari, it is submitted was overthrown because of his lukewarm attitude to participate further in Sharia promotion and would rather promote democracy. The contention that the Nigeria military was the custodian of our democracy and therefore in a position to stage a coup because of flawed elections of 1983 was a fallacy. Rather, the coup was staged in furtherance of Sharia. It is pertinent to mention that Nigeria has MSS and JNI which Gumi said he established for other reasons but which may have been established to meet the criteria of the Brotherhood of Egypt

Sheikh Gumi
Paul M. Lubeck in his article Mapping a Sharia Restorationist Movement wrote:
“Responsibility for the construction of the Muslim public sphere fell instead upon the shoulders of the northern nationalists leaders and their advisors. These men had been educated in elite English-language schools like Katsina College, hybrid but essentially modern instructions, which had been established by the colonial state to rationalize indirect rule and create an educated administrative class. Educated in Western as well as Islamic learning, the Muslim nationalist leaders struggled among themselves, as well as with the British and southern nationalists, over the question of how to balance national and regional powers, the position of non-Muslims in the Northern Region’s government, and the role that Sharia would play in the embryonic Nigeria polity”[3]

That Jamaat Nasral – Islam [JNI] which was established in 1963, was promoted by Gumi in addition to being the person most responsible for the restoration of Sharia criminal law in Nigeria. In his autobiography he wrote:
“I discussed it with the Sardauna, and he accepted that there was the need for a more formal organization to handle the matter. This was when we decided to sound out the opinion of some Muslims living in Kaduna. Eventually the meeting prepared the brief agenda. Present at first meeting were the Premier, Ali Akilu, Ahmed Talib, Ahmed Joda, Armita’u Katsina and many others, including virtually all the Muslim Permanent Secretaries in the government. It was strictly voluntary though, and a few did actually withdraw from the group later. We discussed at length the problem of teaching converts in this country and those who wanted to learn about Islam, because there were no qualified teachers or any serious organisation they could turn to for help. Finally, we all agreed to set up an association to render this type of assistance. --- Mallam Abubakar Imam suggested that it should also include our objective, so it was better to call it ‘Jama’atu Nasril Islam (JNI), to which we agreed.” [4]

Gumi spearheaded neo salafi Islamic reform for about forty years challenging what he believed were the Brotherhood’s uni-Islamic innovations [bidah], sponsoring the upgrading of modern Islamic education and insisting on the need to fully implement Sharia law at all levels in Nigeria. Gumi’s exposure to neo-salafi groups like the Muslim Brotherhood had an impact on him. He was a strong advocate for increasing Muslim women access to education and their participation in electoral politics. Gumi translated the Quran into Hausa.

The Reconciliation that never was
In the year 2000 a group of Eminent Nigerians known as the Committee of Concerned Citizens tried to organize a conference to which this presenter was invited. Chief S. L. Edu was the Chairman of the group and it included the following personalities - Mr. Kehinde Sofola, SAN (Secretary), Alhaji Mohammed Abdulrahman, Ambassador Hamzat Ahmadu, CON, Chief Sunday Awoniyi CON, Alhaji (Dr.) Adamu Tafawa Balewa CON, Justice Mohammed Bello, GCON, Senator David Dafinone, Alhaji Ibrahim Damcida, Mr. David Dankaro, Alhaji M. D. Galadima, Alhaji Abdulahi Ibrahim, OFR, SAN, Alhaji Babatunde Jose, Alhaji Sule Katagum, CMG, Brig. Gen. Abba Kyari (rtd), Dr. M. A. Majekodunmi, Dr. M. T. Mbu, Alhaji Aliko Monguno, Prof. Ben Nwabueze, SAN, Vice Admiral Nyako, (rtd.) GCON, Chief Chris O. Ogunbanjo, OFR, Dr. Pius Okigbo, Alhaji Akanbi Oniyangi, Ambassador (Dr.) Maitama Sule, Alhaji Bamanga Tukur, Mr. Ola Vincent, CFR, Mr. Akintola Williams, CBE, OFR, Chief Rotimi Williams, CFR, CON, SAN, Professor Auwalu Yadudu, Alhaji M. D. Yusufu, Alhaji Hamza R. Zayyad. A working paper for the dialogue was circulated but unfortunately and for some unexplained reasons the dialogue could not hold. The information that came to some members was that one of the resource persons Hon. Mr. Justice Mohammed Bello had received threats for saying that Sharia was unconstitutional. This was an unfortunate incident. However the circulated working papers for the Dialogue remained a very valuable document. For this reason part of the submissions of some of the contributions relevant to the issue of dual ideology being practised in Nigeria is reproduced below.

The draft communiqué set out the concerns of these Eminent Nigerians thus, “After very anxious and serious consideration of all aspects of the matter, we have come to the conclusion that the best and most effective option open for the solution of the problem is to make arrangement for dialogue among leading citizens who are interested in the progress and stability of this country on the one hand and supporters and opponents of the proposals for the incorporation of Sharia into the legal system of some of the States in the country on the other hand.”

Hon. Mr. Justice Mohammed Bello considered the question of Sharia and the Constitution, Prof. A. Yadudu wrote on the Sharia Debate in Nigeria and titled his talk Time for Reflection, and Prof. Abdul-Lateef Adegbite on Sharia in the context of Nigeria. Vice Admiral M. H Nyako [rtd] GCON paper was on The Prevailing Sharia controversy while Chief Rotimi Williams wrote on The Sharia Controversy and Professor Ben O. Nwabueze on Constitutional Problems of Sharia. Also included in the publication were Extracts from Notes on the Penal Code Law (1st Edition) – SS Richardson, Commissioner for Native Courts of the Former Northern Region of Nigeria. There was an Appendix containing the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria and Extract from Relevant Legislation. The publication by the committee is a treasure for constitutional lawyers and it is unfortunate that the dialogue did not take place.

Sharia as interpreted by Muslim Contributors
Hon. Justice Bello’s viewpoints can be inferred from the concluding paragraphs of his paper as he wrote” “it is clear from the provision of section 36 (12) that a person should not be convicted for any Sharia offence unless that offence and its punishment are enacted by the National Assembly or a state House of Assembly. Accordingly, application of the Sharia criminal law without codification by the National Assembly or a state House of Assembly will be unconstitutional. --- It should be stated here, for the avoidance of doubt, that the Sharia law as stated in the Quran, Hadith and other sources is not a “written law” within the meaning of Section 36 (12) of the 1999 Constitution. --- There is yet another constitutional obstacle to the full application of Sharia law as has been advocated. Section 38 (1) of the constitution ensures for every person the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion including freedom to change his religion or belief, whereas under Sharia, ridda (change of religion) is a capital offence. Consequently, the offence of ridda is inconsistent with Section 38(1) and by virtue of Section 1 is unconstitutional.”

Professor Yadudu in his The Sharia Debate in Nigeria Dialogue of the Deaf for the purpose of his presentation on the aspect dealing with Basis of the Sharia stated, “Firstly, Section 38 of 1999 Constitution guarantees freedom of religion. A Muslim firmly believes that his submission to the Will of Allah is inchoate if he were to choose or be made to follow some part of His, Allah’s injunctions, the personal law, and abandon others, the penal system. The Sharia, defined as the Path which embodies the totality of Islamic guidance, seeks to govern every aspect of a believer’s life. Islam, being a complete way of life for the believers, knows not the dichotomy so much flaunted by non-Muslims, especially Christians, that religion is a private affair of the individual. To the best of his belief, therefore, a Muslim, conceives of his faith as demanding a total submission to the Sharia. To a Muslim, freedom of conscience and to profess a religion of his choice alone or in company of others amounts to not much if a precondition, which by the way may be perfectly acceptable to followers of other religions, is stipulated for him.

Vice Admiral M. Nyako’s paper consisted of the moral usefulness of Sharia: “it should be remembered that the issue of Sharia, or any religious matter' is a sensitive subject. Muslims should be left and encouraged to work out, in their own way, a course of action to suit prevailing exigency. Non-Muslims should understand that direct interference on this issue would only aggravate matters and that denying a Muslim his Constitutional right to practise his religion is tantamount to a declaration of war against him. Very dangerous indeed! The real issue before us is the existence of moral decadence in our country which is agitating our souls and threatening to stir up religious bigotry (in our midst) with dire foreseen consequences. The objective is 'Nigerians want peace including religious harmony, and progress of their nation.' The Team, this our Academy of Peace, is to identify desired practical solutions within the context of the Nigerian Constitution and describe specific, quantifiable and practical goals. It should simultaneously carry out basic, development and adaptive research on the matter and identify the best methods of social transfer achieving the goals by its Team and the greater Nigerian society. It should also supervise and take action as appropriate to achieve results. The major role of the Federal Government in this matter is to provide adequate funds from Defence and Security allocations as grants to achieve the goals which should remain eternal. The Academy working with government is to withhold funds for any organisation which is not playing its role effectively”

Dr. Abdul – Lateef Adegbite’s consideration of Protection of Freedom of Religion is relevant. He wrote: “An area, which has attracted much attention, is the fear of non-Muslims that the application of the new Sharia Law could restrict their right to freedom of religion, which the Constitution protects. The Zamfara State Executive Governor has given assurance that the Government would not discriminate against any group on religious or other grounds: “Islam guarantees the rights of non-Muslims to practise their religion without hindrance, and prohibits injustice of any kind against non-Muslims. The Government of Zamfara State will therefore ensure the security of lives and properties of all people irrespective of their religion or tribe and will ensure justice and fairness to all”. Since the Constitution guarantees the freedom of religion, the same protection must be extended to Islam as a religion that regulates the totality of the life of every adherent. This is an important point, because the protection accorded to Islam must be to the religion as understood and practised by the Muslims, the adherents of the faith, and not as unobjectively defined by non-Muslims. The sad development in this country is that some would want Christianity and Islam, two disparate religions, to be unformalized.”

Prof. Ben O. Nwabueze’s paper in part reads, “the fact that the jurisdiction of the Sharia Court of Appeal is restricted only to matters involving Islamic personal law as set out in section 242 of the 1979 Constitution (or section 277 of the 1999 Constitution) does not of course mean that other aspects of Sharia civil law are denied constitutional recognition; as earlier noted, the continued application of such other aspects as part of existing laws is recognized but the recognition is subject to their not being inconsistent with any provision of the Constitution (section 315(3)).”

With Sharia criminal law, the position is completely different. I agree with the Hon. Mohammed Bello, the retired CJN, that without codification by law enacted by the National Assembly or a State House of Assembly, the application of Sharia criminal law by virtue of authority derived from the Quran or the Sunnah will be inconsistent with section 36(12) which prohibits the conviction of a person of a criminal offence “unless that offence is defined and the penalty therefore is prescribed” in a law enacted by the National Assembly or a State House of Assembly. Sharia also runs foul of the Constitution where punishment under it, e.g. amputation of the hand or haddi (lashing) as these not only involve torture but are also inhuman and degrading and also otherwise derogatory of human dignity (section 34(1)); as in where change of religion, which is guaranteed by section 38(1), is prohibited and made punishable by death (riddah)

But with the greatest respect to the retired CJN, the matter goes far beyond the non-codification of Sharia criminal law by an enactment of the National Assembly or a State House of Assembly. The question is whether the power of the federal or state government can, conformably with the prohibition in section 10 of the Constitution, be employed to codify Sharia criminal law in all its plenitude as ordained by the Quran, the Sunnah and other Islamic holy books, and to enforce it against Moslem and non-Moslem offenders alike by arrest, detention and prosecution. To restrict the application of such a code to Moslems alone will lay bare its character as the law, albeit in a codified form, of the religion of Islam, and expose it as a state sponsorship of religion. The conclusion is thus inescapable that the prohibition in section 10 of the Constitution stamps with an indelible taint of unconstitutionality, the Sharia criminal law, whether in its original form as contained in the Quran and the Sunnah or in a codified form to be enacted by the National Assembly or a State House of Assembly.
Nwabueze continued, “I am increasingly skeptical of the wisdom or desirability of embroiling our courts in the destructive conflict of religious politics, or the use of the federal might to force the states in the North to obey the command of section 10 of the Constitution. Dialogue seems to me a better way of trying to resolve the issue. If the states in the North are bent on adopting Sharia criminal law, and refuse to be persuaded to drop the idea, they must be taken to have opted for a confederal arrangement or a complete break-up of the association. It is better to pull apart or break up in peace than fight over the issue. [Emphasis supplied]

Chief Rotimi Williams’s memorandum recommended a short term solution which reads, “I would readily agree with the Honourable Mohammed Bello and Professor Nwabueze that the provisions intended to be applied in both of these States would be illegal and unconstitutional. None of us sitting at this meeting has any right to stop any person affected by the unconstitutional activity of a State Government to take that State to court. In the circumstance, I assume that the courts will be involved in this controversy sometime or the other. Furthermore, I do not believe that in the situation which has arisen it can be right for the Honourable Attorney-General of the Federation who is charged with the duty of maintaining the Constitution to sit down and fold his arms and simply watch events as they unfold. He ought to do something.”

It is unfortunate that not one of the Attorney’s-General of the Federation has had the courage to take the twelve state governments to court for the determination of the constitutionality of their Sharia Laws. The presenter once wrote to an Attorney-General of the Federation to intervene on the illegality being committed by an arm of the Executive. The Attorney-General informed the presenter that he could not, because his political masters said he should not. It is necessary to point out here that the office of the Attorney-General of the Federation or State is a creation of the Constitution and is not subject to any other office such as President or Governor unless in situations so specifically stated. The 1960 Constitution contained the Post of Director of Public Prosecution (DPP) to conduct prosecutions independently. The 1963 Constitution abolished the post of DPP and substituted same with that of the Attorney-General. The understanding it is submitted, is that as prosecutor, the Attorney-General is independent of any other authority. As cabinet member and Minister of Justice, he is to advise government so that government would not fall foul of the law. It is not intended to make the Attorney-General an agent for the protection of criminality or illegality of any political party. It is instructive that non-Sharia lawyer’s knowledge has improved and the talk of divine law by mortals has been better understood.

Relationship between Islam and the State
The Economist of July 5th 2014 wrote:
“The unresolved issue of proper relations between Islam and the state represents a chronic conundrum. For most of the time since the first caliphate governments have outwardly endorsed the notion that temporal laws must be subservient to religious rulings while doing as they wish and ensuring that jurists toe the line. In the 19th century the governments of Turkey, Egypt and Tunisia all moved to trim the influence of sharia judges, not under European pressure but because their unpredictable rulings were an obstacle to commerce as well as to government power. The modern spread of Islamism as an explicitly political expression of Islamic thought has created another set of problems. Groups such as the Muslim Brotherhood, a wellspring of Islamism since its founding in 1928, claim that the founding texts of Islam provide a template for every aspect of life, including government. The trouble is that these texts are open to widely varying interpretations. As the proliferation of Islamist political parties proves, it is hard to balance the notion of a fixed, immutable source with the changing whims of democratic politics. Instead, one dominant party is liable to try to silence rivals, a process which often involves outbidding them in a contest for greater “authenticity”.

The ideologies-Democracy and Sharia are incompatible and cannot co-exist. In the book Sharia and the State, An-Na’im observed
“it is clear that there is no uniform and settled understanding of Shari'a among Muslims that can be enforced by the state. This is true even within the same school of Sunni or Shi'a jurisprudence, let alone across different schools and sects. It should be emphasized at this level that since every understanding of Shari'a, even if universal among Muslims, is a human interpretation, none should be enforced as state law in the name of Shari'a or Islam as such. At another level, because Shari'a is always the product of human interpretation of divine sources, any interpretation of it will reflect the human limitations of those who are interpreting it, despite the divinity of the sources they are working with. From this perspective Shari'a will always remain open to reinterpretation and evolution, in response to the constantly changing needs of Islamic societies and communities in different times and places.”
[Shari’a in the West edited by Rex Ahdar & Nicholas Aroney page 3]
It is very clear from the above interpretation of divine law (Sharia) that our Muslim brothers have not been altogether open to non-Muslims and Nigerians in general. Sharia should not be enforced as a State law and our Muslim brothers know this fact. This explains why the Sardauna had to take the trouble to pass the 1960 Penal Code and the Code of Criminal Procedure:
“The most important of the Panel’s recommendations was that it was necessary for a self-governing Northern Region to establish a system of criminal law which would gain international acceptance, which would apply uniformly to all persons living within the Region, which would not discriminate against any section of the community and which would be generally acceptable throughout the Region. Since the majority of the people living within the Region are Moslems, it was also considered advisable that the new system should not be in conflict with the injunctions of the Holy Qu'ran and Sunna. After carefully considering various possible systems, the Panel recommended that the Northern Region should introduce a Penal Code and Code of Criminal Procedure based upon the equivalent Sudan Codes, which had worked satisfactorily in a country in many ways similar to the Northern Region. The Sudan Codes were introduced into that country in 1899 and were, in their turn, modeled closely upon the Indian Codes. It was recognized that local modifications to suit the particular requirements of the Northern Region would be necessary.”

The Sharia law of the twelve Northern States is to strengthen the “invisible” government in the Presidency. It is an instrument of violence.

The Principles of Sharia as the Main Source of Legislation in Nigeria
Those who took pains to count the number of times Sharia and Islamic law were mentioned in the Constitution, as proof that Nigeria is as Islamic country are mistaken. It is Nigeria as a country that decided that she is an Islamic country when she applied for membership of the Organization of Islamic Conference (OIC) because the onus lay on the applying country to convince herself that she is an Islamic country before applying. President Babangida was satisfied when he applied and sent a strong delegation to attend the conference in Morocco. Nigeria’s membership of OIC qualified her as member of Islamic D8. All members of the OIC are members of the United Nations but not all members of the UN are members of the OIC. These Muslim organizations were set up in my submission to compete with the UN in importance among Muslim countries. In Nigeria, Sharia as a fact is more important than Democracy as contained in the Constitution.
Democracy under the Constitution
Section 14 of the 1999 Constitution provides that: (1) The Federal Republic of Nigeria shall be a State based on the principles of democracy and social justice; (2) It is hereby, accordingly, declared that – (a) Sovereignty belongs to the people of Nigeria from whom government through this Constitution derives all its powers and authority: (b) the security and welfare of the people shall be the primary purpose of government: and (c) the participation by the people in their government shall be ensured in accordance with the provisions of this Constitution

Unfortunately the Supreme Court in a number of cases refused to enforce the above provisions especially in election cases, notwithstanding provisions of section 13 which states, “it shall be the duty and responsibility of all organs of government, and of all authorities and persons, exercising legislative, executive or judicial powers, to conform to, observe and apply the provisions of the chapter of the Constitution”. Today all Federal Courts are dominated by Muslims who for many years were Sharia Judges and not having been called to the Nigerian Bar, got up to the Court of Appeal based on the superiority of Sharia over the Constitution and, today in most Federal Courts, Muslims are at the head and when occasions demand, Sharia is made to override the Constitution.

A Muslim some years ago had his arm amputated for theft notwithstanding Section 34 that entrenched the dignity of the human person. During the time of President Obasanjo it was alleged that it was as a result of the advice of the then Chief Justice of Nigeria that the Sharia law of the 12 Northern States were constitutional that President Obasanjo decided not to test these Sharia laws in the Supreme Court. It would appear that President Obasanjo did not consider the Islamic injunction of Taqiyya and the Islamic practice of fatua, which could be placed on Muslim, Judges that rule against Sharia. Taqiyya means that it is permissible for a Muslim to lie, especially to non-Muslims, to safeguard himself or herself personally or to protect Islam. “Let not the believers take the disbelievers as friends instead of the believers, and whoever does that, will never be helped by Allah in any way, unless you indeed fear a danger from them. And Allah warns you against Himself, and to Allah is the final return.” (Q 3:28); Unless you indeed fear a danger from them’ meaning, except those believers who in some areas or times fear for their safety from the disbelievers, such believers are allowed to show friendship to the disbelievers outwardly, but never inwardly.…‘We smile in the face of some people although our hearts curse them.’” (Tafsir Ibn Kathir, Vol 2, 141); Mohammed said, ‘War is deceit.’” (Bukhari vol.4:267 and 269); and “He who makes peace between the people by inventing good information or saying good things, is not a liar,” (Bukhari vol.3:857 p.533) like the CJN who advised President Obasanjo. The atmosphere today is different in that the target of Boko Haram is to murder all Nigerians who want democracy. Christians, Muslims and Animists must all join hands to defeat Boko Haram otherwise we are dead.

Boko Haram: History and Development
Boko Haram dates back to 1980. The sect emanated from the Izala Movement which was created by Skeikh Isma’ila Idrisbin Zakariyaorithin when Sheikh Gumi was the Grand Khadi of Northern Nigeria (1962-67) and created the enabling climate for the creation of the Izala Movement. Gumi felt the need for the renewal of Islam to be purified and to return to its roots as in the time of Prophet Mohammed. This movement established itself and found acceptance first amongst the Kanuris in the Northeast of Nigeria. The Izala Movement itself is an offshoot of Walhabism that grew up in Saudi Arabia.

Boko Haram is a splinter group of Izala and its first leader Mohammed Yusuf from Yobe State received instruction from Sheikh Ja’afar in the Indimi Mosque. Yusuf was initially attracted to the Taliban and became a member of the Sahaba Group formed in 1995 with its leader as Abubakar Lawan. He raised the Taliban flag over the Sahaba he set up in Yobe State having been pressured by the adherents in his group to do so. Later, this Group of about six, built a Mosque on a land provided by a relative called Baa Fugu, whom Yusuf stayed in his house and married his daughter.

Yusuf became very popular and claimed to be disturbed by what he regarded as the corruption in Islam and the Nigerian Polity and set out to purify both. This attempt was however compromised when he was appointed by Governor Sherrif who charged him with delivering the 2007 election for him. Yusuf himself however was to be accused of accepting funds from Governor Sherrif to ensure that he won the election. This resulted in friction between him and Ja’afar who was not happy at the development. After a series of heated discussions on the matter, Ja’afar was assassinated during Friday morning prayers at the Dorayi Juma’at mosque on April 12 ,2007 the day he was in fact going to denounce Yusuf’s action.
After this development, Yusuf’s teaching eventually led to the recruitment of young men prepared to die for Islam and from then on, the crop of suicide bombers sprouted. Noteworthy is the fact that Yusuf’s Group known as Yusufiya-Jama’at reviled the name Boko Haram which emerged as a name in the mid 1990’s in Yobe State.
Yusuf regarded his primary assignment as the establishment of Sharia throughout the whole of Nigeria and this was in addition to the purification of Islam. Thereafter, the Yusufiya sect sought to eradicate key figures of the state leadership structure including security personnel.

Boko Haram came into popular usage in the media and it was employed to generally describe the sect operating in three groups. After 2009 on Yusuf’s death, his second in command Shekau took over and his sole purpose was to disparage both the Borno State Governor and President Jonathan. A second group that emerged was funded and armed by politicians opposed to the Borno State Government. There was yet a third group, loose adherents of the sect who simply employed it for kidnapping and robbing banks to make money. It was the group led by Shekau that bombed police headquarters in Abuja and which also entered into dialogue with government with a view to signing a peace accord. In fact the original Boko Haram by Yusuf has since ceased operations.

Nigeria first Suicide Bomber
The Vanguard of Tuesday, December 19 2003 on page 33 wrote as reported by Ochereome Nnanna: “a couple of weeks ago in our new capital city Abuja, the unbelievable happened. It is unbelievable because these are some of the things that people would say "cannot happen" in Nigeria. But from the information I gathered from the brother of one of the surviving victims in my recent trip to Abuja, Nigeria may have recorded its first incidence of suicide attack, the daily diet of terror in the Middle East. Chief Foster Ogbalu, a middle aged man from Abagana in Anambra State sat in a city transit bus with about fifteen other commuters. He was traveling from Gwagwalada to the University of Abuja to fill the forms for his post-graduate studies when, on the way, tragedy in human form, walked in. The bus pulled up at a bus stop and presently, a man holding a covered plastic bucket entered the bus. He made sure he was the last person to enter. Then, he bolted the door. The driver, conductor and some of the commuters were still wondering what the strange man was up to, when he uncovered the bucket and threw the contents of the bucket – petrol around the bus. Most of the passengers were partially or wholly doused in the deadly inflammable liquid. There was utter confusion. The man next reached into his pocket and brought out a box of matches. That was when Ogbalu knew that the lives of everyone in the bus were in danger. He raised the alarm. "it is petrol! Run! He hollered". A stampede ensued. People rushed towards the only open door. Ogbalu realized that if he as the nearest person to the maniac also attempted to run away and the man struck that match he would surely go up in flames, for he was one of those almost completely wetted by the fuel. So, in a desperate move, he went after the man. He grabbed him from the back, but unfortunately, one of the man's hands was free. As they struggled and Ogbalu edged them both towards the driver's open door, the man did not even try to shake loose from Ogbalu's grip, He concentrated on striking the match. He eventually succeeded. Fire immediately engulfed him, Ogbalu and the bus. Ogbalu let go of him and scampered out of the bus a human torch in full conflagration. It was like something you saw in the movies. The difference though, was that the fires in the movies are faked. The actors come out of their routine without a scratch. But the fire on Ogbalu was real enough. Today he is lying critically ill at the National Hospital, Abuja, all peeled up but now out of danger list. The only part of him that is free from the burns is the hollow of his eyes. There is not a single hair on his head. The attacker died in the inferno, burnt beyond recognition and identification. --- Nigeria looks very much like a very attractive haven for agents of terrorist outfits, which are ready to part with huge sums of money. Illiteracy, poverty and the eagerness of politicians to exploit religious sentiments to score against their opponents added to the already existing religious bigotry are factors that can attract trouble makers. In addition, the nation is just porous, so porous that foreign nationals form cells of soldiers of fortune and make themselves available for hire by those who have an axe to grind with their neighbours. The question is whether the authorities even bother themselves with this kind of problem. Are we waiting until (heavens forbid) something really earthshaking happens? This is a wake-up call for all Nigerians." The presenter wrote to the Inspector General of Police, Tafa Balogun in December 2002 and confirming the incident, informed us that the incident was under investigation. We heard nothing further about this incident and we are not in a position to say whether the man acted alone or is a member of an organization or group.

Boko Haram’s Country
It is necessary for one to establish the strength of this Islamic organization by reproducing in full this report of a few days ago – Thursday, August 21, 2014 which reads:
“Boko Haram insurgents have seized Buni Yadi town, headquarters of Guja Local Government Area of Yobe State, and hoisted their flag at the palace of the district head. Residents who fled to the state capital Damaturu said yesterday the militants have set up base at the palace, and have been enforcing their own laws on people in the town. Daily Trust gathered that the insurgents stormed the palace on July 30, but could not find the district head as he managed to scale the fence and flee to Damaturu where he is still taking refuge. But it was not clear if the attackers remained at the palace since that day or they left to return later. "They have turned the district head's palace into their base. Two flags with Arabic inscriptions were hoisted at the entrance, and armed militants stood guard, while many of them sleep inside," a man who does not want to be named told Daily Trust. A resident who fled following the Boko Haram takeover said militants have started enforcing their own laws for days now. "They shot two people dead over cigarette smoking, and another man was beaten 80 lashes for living with a woman who was said not to be his wife," he said. Insurgents are moving freely on motorbikes, and manning security check points around the Buni Yadi, the man added. Another resident said the insurgents came to his house to preach, and also asked why he still remained in the town. He said, "Three insurgent groups came to interview me, asking almost similar questions, 'why do you prefer to stay in Yadi? Are you with your family?’” He said the following morning his family advised him to leave the town immediately while other family members would follow him later. The takeover of Buni Yadi is coming two weeks after militants overran Gwoza in neighbouring Borno State. Efforts by troops to take the town back have failed so far, according to reports. Before Gwoza, Boko Haram men had taken Damboa, also in Borno, but control of the town was later reclaimed by soldiers. Buni Yadi had seen repeated insurgency raids, including the deadly attack on the Federal Government College in which dozens of students were killed in February. An attack on the military and police bases there on May 27 left 18 soldiers and 15 policemen dead. Less than two weeks earlier, Boko Haram gunmen stormed the town and abducted a traditional ruler and a local chemist. Daily Trust reports that security operatives have abandoned their bases in Buni Yadi and neighbouring areas weeks ago, following Boko Haram attacks in which they destroyed the only bridge linking southern Yobe to Damaturu. Many people in the area express fears of looming food shortage due to inability of farmers to cultivate this season. Residents of Bara, the headquarters of Gulani Local Government Area, said also that insurgents have taken over town and other neigbhouring towns including Bularafa. But Daily Trust could not get details yesterday.”
[Daily Trust newspaper]

Boko Haram Overruns Police Academy in Borno ...hoists flag as trainee riot policemen flee:
“A riot police training academy near Gwoza , Borno State has been overrun by Boko Haram Islamist militants, a witness told the British Broadcasting Corporation that shots were heard after the militants arrived in three Armoured Personal Carriers and on dozens of motorcycles. The BBC said in its report on Thursday that a police spokesman confirmed the attack. It added that a senior security source said it had not been possible to communicate with the academy known as Liman Kara Police College since Wednesday.”

The above shows that those in charge of the college are collaborators and Police hierarchy can rightly be accused under the criminal code as parties to the offence of insurgency.
The Nation newspaper reported on the Police College incident the following day,
“The police could not gain access to Gwoza to reclaim the academy where the insurgents have hoisted their flags. According to a reliable source who is central to the management of how to retake the academy, none of the trainees could be located. The source said: “Preliminary findings showed that the insurgents invaded the school in the morning when most of the mobile police trainees were in their training shorts and vests. --- They overran the academy, burnt some parts of it and hoisted their flags. All those in the school fled and we cannot account for their whereabouts. “Yesterday some of the trainees were said to have been sighted in Yola and Mubi where they got in touch with their superiors and relations. We are suspecting that some of these trainees might have also managed to escape to their squadrons. Responding to a question, the highly-placed source said: “We cannot rule out if any of the trainees had been captured or not by the insurgents because it was a sudden invasion and the topography is hilly.” [Saturday, August 23, 2014]

There seem to be some collaboration here, as the most important safeguard function in the circumstance became personal safety suggestive of a willingness to cooperate with the rampaging Boko Haram terrorists.

The Atrocities of Boko Haram
In the front page publication of The Sun of a few days ago, one Alhaji Mustapha Oyeyinka and his wife escaped from the insurgents. He narrated a harrowing experience and part of the story is reproduced below:
“One of such is Alhaji Mustapha Oyeyinka who is now cursing the day he decided to relocate to Nigeria from Europe where his family has been doing fine. Today, he has not only lost his sight to the insurgents but live with an agonizing memory of seeing his wife raped along with other women almost on a daily basis for three months in one of the camps of the deadly sect in Kaduna State. --- Suddenly, there were gunshots; people started lying down on the floor while some were shouting Jesus! Jesus! In a split of seconds, they shot all those who they heard shouting Jesus. It was then that it dawned on me that these were no robbers. --- On May 8, 2011, the camp remained deserted because they had gone out to hunt. One of the guards came to our cell and picked the prettiest woman among the women. For fear that his people might see him; he shifted her to the end of the hall and had sex with her there. She was just screaming. While he was at it, we heard the sound of the truck, and he quickly ran out of the hall and forgot to lock the cell. They all jumped into the truck and drove off. We waited till everywhere was really quiet and took off into the bush. My wife was there to assist me since I could no longer see. We only left a young girl who was too weak behind. She was young and beautiful, so sometime they will come for her more than once in a day. It was a survival of the fittest, so we left her behind. “We got to a point and a Fulani woman who was fetching firewood asked us to follow her. She took us to their village head where we were given food and clothes. He also made an arrangement for a vehicle to take us to Kaduna town. We took the next bus down to Lagos. --- Collaborating her husband’s story, Mrs. Rachael Oyeyinka who still looks visibly shaken said that it was God that destined that they will survive the abduction. “They took turns to rape all the women. I cannot count the number of times but every day. Some of the women got pregnant, and they were given concoctions to drink and flush it out. So many of the women who resisted were killed. If you are very pretty, they will initially reserve you for their leader. As soon as he gets another replacement, he will push the woman out for general use. It was bad and I remained strong because I had children who still need their mother. Today, my husband is blind but we strongly hope that he will regain his sight. I can’t wait to get out of this country. We are based in Spain and because my husband wanted to relocate some of the kids to Nigeria, we returned about three years ago. [The Saturday Sun August 23, 2014]

It is our hope and prayers that the same fate does not befall on the Chibok girls.

The presenter’s fear as in the militarization of the country by the para-military – Police, Customs, Immigration who now wear military fatigue as uniform, Civil Defence, Road Safety Corps and the numerous Vigilantes, Road Traffic Wardens, Unions etc is cause for concern. It is hoped that these people are not reserves that are available to assist Sharia government to overrun the North if not Nigeria as a whole, the way parts of Syria and Iraq have been overrun to create ISIS – Islamic State of Iraq and Syria.

The Chibok girls’ parents want the case of their daughters closed and funeral rites have already been performed. The advocacy group Bring Back Our Girls at the Unity Fountain, Abuja was alleged to have expressed this sentiment as coming from some of the parents of the Chibok girls:
“All they said they want is their corpses to bury them honourably,” the group said. --- According to them, over 200 groups in Abuja have so far been contacted and have given positive response to participate, with 135 individuals on the group’s database contacted. While calling on federal government to double its effort to free the girls, the meeting said only political and military action can rescue our girls, and that is why we do what we are doing to compel that. The group added a new slogan #NotWithoutOurDaughters! in response to a question on when it will stop the campaign.” [Vanguard, Saturday 23, 2014]

Nigeria will be the first country in the world that would conduct funeral for the living.

Recently the Arewa Consultative Forum (ACF) gave President Jonathan an ultimatum that if the Chibok girls were not released by October, the President should forget 2015 i.e. that he should not contest the next Presidential Election. One begins to wonder whether the ACF has hands in the delay of the rescue of these girls, so as to prevent President Jonathan’s participation in 2015 elections and work towards the fulfillment of the prediction that Nigeria will break up in 2015. One also wonders why the ACF is working hard to ensure that this prediction comes to pass in a situation where all other well-meaning Nigerians are working and praying for unity and prosperity of Nigeria.

Working from set Answers
There is evidence that the Presidency has imbibed the colonial system of working from answers. The writer was a member of the Presidential Committee for National Conference or Dialogue who submitted a minority report, which was received and acknowledged by the President, yet the Presidency issued the statement that no minority report was submitted and went on to procure the services of intelligence officers who were members of the committee to attack his integrity publicly and in private. The crime of the presenter is that his minority report was a complete diversion from the expected pre-conceived answers.

This colonial system of working from answers was responsible for government refusal to increase the NBA quota to the conference. The inclusion of more members to join the President of the NBA was refused and as a result, the NBA could not participate in the conference. The Sharia Presidency has over the period reunited and strengthened the Mukhabarat (secret agents) for the protection and promotion of Sharia, who exhibit impunity in their conduct. It was particularly sad when Nigeria’s foremost constitutional lawyer Prof. Ben Nwabueze was appointed to serve under a non-lawyer. This also explains why the Chairman of PAC, Chief Okurounmu, refused to forward the presenter’s minority report to the Presidency. No Lawyer would have acted in such an illegal manner to deprive the President from receiving the reports of the PAC collectively and individually. As a result of the illegal act, the presenter was equally denied his right under the Constitution guaranteed in Section 39, Right to Freedom of Expression. Sharia is holding our democratically elected President hostage, this must not be allowed to continue. Liberal Democracy is the answer.

In his minority report the presenter averred that a system of rule and society of which an important ingredient is the operation of Muslim law connotes an ideology different from Liberal Democracy and that it is the pursuit of this ideology that in his view, is responsible for:
i. Conflict of ideology whereby corruption, insecurity, evil acts became instruments of the ideological war with operatives (Mukhabarat) dominating public offices and even the private sector;
ii. This invisible and shadowy power structure that needs to be dismantled in order that we may not unwittingly actualize the prediction that God forbid, Nigeria may disintegrate in 2015, and that
iii. The proliferation of Traditional Rulers for the wrong reasons in a Democratic country serves to weaken liberal democracy;

The Sharia Presidency did not like the expressed opinion. Continuing, the presenter maintained that the issues of boundary of North and South that has remained like the boundary between two foreign countries combined with the “victory” of “the North over the South” in the civil war provided the mould that “churns” out the nature of governance that has become cast in iron in the promotion of Sharia. This, the presenter continued is responsible for the prevalence of insecurity that has made the promotion of democracy very difficult in Nigeria because an invisible force outside the government was put in place for the purpose. The minority report concluded that this invisible force is the problem of the country in its pursuit of divergent interests, goals and aspirations different from democracy and rule of law which were agreed by our leaders in the 1957/58 London Conference and also reflected in section 14 of the 1999 Constitution. Indirect Rule is still being rigorously prosecuted, and internal colonialism has been reinvented in present day Nigeria by the same invisible force in order to strengthen its position. This invisible power bloc must be made visible. It is now very clear that Sharia is the invisible force.

Nigeria a One Party State
Nigeria is a one party state (Sharia) and the political parties are mere branches that are not allowed to formulate their ideologies, which explains the constant inter party movement. These movements are done with the concurrence of the Sharia Presidency. “Sharia” is the basis of all laws in Nigeria and is therefore superior to the “Constitution”. The problem with Nigeria is racial in part whereby Arab descendants wants to foist Arab culture under the guise of Sharia on the whole country. For this purpose it created an intelligence unit (Mukhabarat) that uses all methods fair or foul to promote Sharia. The Mukhabarat succeeded in getting hold of the Presidency and at their pleasure the ideological war is fought ensuring that democracy does not erode its strategy based on the premise that “Sharia is the basis of all laws in Nigeria”. This made it impossible for Nigeria to have a single goal or dream. Another example of the one nature and belief including ideology of political rulers can be inferred from the conduct of all the 36 Governors and the Minister of the FCT. The presenter under the auspices of the Ethnic Nationalities Movement (ENM) wrote to the Governors and the Minister of the FCT for support to meet the expenses of the conference by Ethnic Nationalities in Nigeria. Of the 37 only the Governor of Edo State Comrade Oshiomhole replied and none gave any support to the Ethnic Nationalities Conference with the theme Towards a Truly Representative National Conference February 11- 12, 2014. An Aide of the Governor of Niger State telephoned to say that his Governor would attend the conference but he never did. One would have thought that states that have ethnic minorities from where delegates who participated came would attend and support the conference. This was not to be because of the one party state that the invisible government continues to nurture in Nigeria

Industrial Revolution
Industrial Revolution was the transition from manual to new manufacturing processes in the period between 1760 to about 1840. The transition was from manual to machines, new chemicals manufacturing, iron processing, improved water power process, steam power, the development of machines and change from wood to coal. Boko Haram’s expectation and dream for Nigeria is the direct opposite of those of the industrial revolution and if the terrorists are not defeated, unemployment will increase and standard of living will fall. Industrial Revolution some historians say, was brought about “by the end of feudalism in Britain after the English civil war in the 17th Century. Nigeria is re-inventing feudalism. It is a fact that when the revolution started in England, infant mortality was reduced. British Agricultural Revolution made food production more efficient and less labour intensive. The colonial expansion of the 17th century promoted international trade, created financial market, and the accumulation of capital. It also encouraged factors that created the Industrial Revolution. Knowledge was spread by several means, workers made study tours and gathered information about new professional ideas by keeping diaries. Records kept by Industrialists and technicians during the period of Industrial Revolution are a valuable source of information about the methods of the period.

Sharia is the direct opposite of the industrial revolution with the policies it tries to enforce as is with Boko Haram and its desire of a world caliphate through violence and force. It is feudalistic and retrogressive. As has been shown earlier, the enforcement of Sharia is in fact the protection of a system that perpetuates oligarchy because the oligarchs are the interpreters of Sharia. It is essentially politics of the stomach typified by Boko Haram. We have remained stagnant over the years because of our dual ideology. Brazil, India, Indonesia, China etc with whom Nigeria’s GDP effectively competed in the 1960s that have one ideology have made progress. Until Nigeria develops democracy as its ideology industrial revolution will only remain a mirage.

Sharia Propensity
Nigeria’s three arms of government are divided along ideological lines and this explains why there are mutineers in our armed forces and why there are promoters of democracy and also promoters of Sharia especially Abacha. This reality made some eminent Nigerians to reject the centenary award. It was in promotion of Sharia that Murtala Mohammed embarked on his purge of the civil service in 1975 and 1976. It is also in the promotion of Sharia that Abacha looted the Central Bank and unleashed savage brutality on innocent Nigerians. Abacha died in a mysterious circumstance, so did Abiola. It is also for the same reason that Buhari backdated the criminal law to execute three Nigerians. It was in furtherance of Sharia that President Babangida dragged Nigeria to OIC and D8. Sharia is also responsible for the annulment of the June 12 Elections and handover to Abacha. The dethroning of Sultan Dasuki was as a result of leadership tussle between two contending Muslim leaders and it is naive for anyone not being an imam to call himself Kalif as did Abacha. The only legitimate and just solution available to Nigerians is to join hands to defeat Boko Haram and once this is done the path to Industrial Revolution would have been created.

Reconciliation is possible. There would be ghastly revelations. There is need to provide enough truth about our past. Resources were used to wage a war against citizens. Fortune, deception, murder, death squads became the order of the day. The truth can be, and often is temporarily divisive. However, it is only on the basis of truth that true reconciliation can take place. We must celebrate our diversity and fight to enshrine national unity and reconciliation, factors that are necessary in shaping Nigeria’s two ideologies Islam and Liberal democracy and the relationships between them. The Historical context of what happened in the 100 years since amalgamation including atrocities committed during military rule, Ogoni, Odi, Zaki Biam should be addressed.

The Sharia proponents, as has been shown are at war with the Constitution. There is need therefore for reconciliation of the two ideologies if it is possible, and the past 100 years of amalgamation should be properly examined for the promotion of a New Nigeria where all citizens or a majority of Nigerians would if necessary want to die for Nigeria. At present some Nigerians are behaving as if Nigeria is their colony where they make money and return to their fatherland in some West African country, Arabia, United Kingdom or United States of America. The reconciliation could be championed by the Nigerian Bar Association in furtherance of the President of the NBA’s call at the special court session in honour of Justice Oputa at the Supreme Court.

The Way Forward
The just concluded National Conference with the benefit of hindsight should have been styled National dialogue because it had no legal backing which in my submission was the case of a deliberate working from answers. However for the future peace and development of Nigeria that would include industrial revolution, the NBA must promote the following actions,
1. Draft two bills for the consideration of the political parties viz
(I) Reconciliation Commission Bill very much like the Truth Commission Act of South Africa with emphasis on Ideology and Reconciliation
(II) A Constituency Assembly Bill with emphasis on Ethnic Representation in which every Ethnic Nationality must have not less than one and not more than ten representatives.
2. These two drafts should be sent to all the political parties interested in the 2015 elections for their consideration and the political parties should eventually make same the bases of their campaign.
3. The Bar should improve on the above presentation, print sufficient copies and make it the basis on which (1) & (2) above are developed.
4. The outgoing President of the NBA should head this Committee on behalf of the Association.

August 26, 2014

[1] Sharia Politics edited by Robert W. Hefner [ Paul M. Lubeck page 245]
[2] Ibid page 147
[3] Ibid page 260
[4] Where I Stand by Sheikh Abubakar Gumi page 105-106