Abdulqadri Ibrahim Abikan is the current Head of Department, Islamic Law, University of Ilorin, Kwara State. He speaks with KAYODE ADEOTI, on the need for the body of benchers to address the controversy surrounding the use of hijab by Muslim ladies during call to bar ceremony among other germane issues. Excerpts:
There has been agitations from some cycles in the society for judges immunity, how do you perceive this?
Our judges enjoy certain level of immunity as far as it relates to their official comfort. They have immunity about the judgement they give.
When they give judgment you don’t call them into question, that on its own is immunity. They have freedom to decide cases as they see or understand it, even if they are wrong, because there is nothing that says a judge must not be wrong. If they misbehave in the conduct of their official function whether they should still enjoy immunity, I don’t think that should be acceptable because they have sworn to an oath to be fair, not to compromise. If they compromise, they should be called to question. To be unjust is worst than killing. I don’t think judges should enjoy immunity for misbehaviour or misconduct they engage in the cause of performing their function. It is going to be an abuse of their office.
Recently, former President Olusegun Obasanjo wrote a letter to the sitting President, asking him to jettison the 2019 re-election bid, what do you consider as legal implications of that development?
Legally, people have the freedom of association which is guaranteed in our constitution under the human right. For people to organise or re-organise themselves, to belong to a political party, to lead another party, form party system, all are legally allowed. If you are talking of social development or political development of a nation where we have progressive people, it is not in line with what former Obasanjo is advocating. With all due respect to him, when I saw a cartoon of Buhari and him facing each other, I wished I am opportune to caption it, I would have written; “I am not asking for a third term” because that was what Obasanjo tried to do when he was in power. What moral justification does he have to tell Buhari not to seek second term? By and large, I’m seeing Buhari performing wonders.
On the issue of the University of Ilorin Law graduate who was denied attending the last Call to Bar ceremony in Abuja, series of comments have trailed the development, can you put things in right perspective?
Many of our judges and lawyers wear artificial wigs on their hair before they put the wig on it. You want to accept artificial wig but you don’t want to accept hijab? There is no law that says someone cannot put on hijab. As a matter of convention, we borrowed our legal profession from England. The English people, they don’t wear hijab traditionally but they have moved on. Today, in England lawyers wear hijab and put their wig on it. In America, lawyers wear hijab not the big hijab but a very light one that covers the hair and neck, and they tuck it into their suits. Some people are arguing that the profession does not allow hijab, what they are saying in essence is that, the legal profession does not admit Muslims. If any profession wants to take such away, it will be going against fundamental human rights of people. It also mean that the profession is discriminatory which is contrary to section (42) of the human rights provision, it’s also contrary to sect (38) that talks about freedom of religion in the way one appears. If anyone says a lady must not use hijab, he or she is asking indirectly that our lady must stop being Muslims if they want to be in the legal profession.
What is your position on the issue?
The incident occurred as a result of communication gap between the body of bencher who are the owner of the event and those who assist them in organising it. A day before the incident, the body of benchers called somebody to bar with hijab, the lady politely told the chairman of the body of bencher that she will not shake hands and she was obliged. But it is the messenger in the organisation that deprived the lady. What I expect now is that, the body of benchers should move, they are still using the old tradition we inherited. Whereas, England has moved on by allowing hijab. They should review that regulation. In England, their men are allowed to wear turban to court, it is not just about ladies. Body of benchers should come out clearly over the issue.
