In the last call-to-bar ceremony in Nigeria, the Body of Benchers shut the gate against the University of Ilorin law graduate, Abdulsalam Firdaos Amosa following her refusal to remove her hijab. The issue has been generating controversy across the country since the time it hit the limelight with various legal and religious groups commenting on the development.
In a recent chat on the issue with the former Grand Khadi of Kwara State, Justice Idris Haroon noted that Amosa was denied her induction on account of her resoluteness to exercise her religious rights as enshrined in the 1999 Constitution.
Also, some Muslim associations have described the rejection of Amosa by the body of Bencher’s as harassment, humiliation and infringement on her fundamental human rights.
Some legal practitioners with divergent views over the issue have however called for a review of the constitution of the country that addresses dressing.
While the issue continues generating controversy in the society, a High Court sitting in Abuja on 28 March, 2018 “prohibited the use of any apparel underneath wigs by lawyers and by extension the hijab by female Muslim lawyers.”
But in a communiqué generated at the end of the National Executive Committee meeting in Benin, Edo State, on April 3, 2018, the Muslim Lawyers’ Association of Nigeria (MULAN) rejected the directive, describing it as “unfortunate, draconian, illegal, unconstitutional and unlawful.”
In the said communiqués signed by its President, Dr. Kamal Dawud, the body contended that the directive by the FCT High Court was at variance with Section 38 of the constitution, which guarantees citizens’ right to manifest their religion.
Legal practitioners in the Kwara state however presented their views on the issue as follows:
Funsho Lawal, Solicitor General/Permanent Secretary, Kwara State Ministry of Justice
The origin of what we wear in the legal profession is not the thinking of one man, not that somebody woken up one day and say, this particular dressing should be for lawyers. No! Nigeria was colonised by the British. In Britain, the way we dress reflect their mode of dressing there because we’ve imbibed everything about them, including their laws, till recently, we were still citing their laws and judgements as authority for us in Nigeria though we have stopped relying on them but there are some cases we still use their laws to address because they are Nobel.
In Britain, they’ve modified this mode of dressing but yet to be amended here and that reflected on our dressing. It has been agitated for and against but we’ve not reached a consensus. Justice Belgore of the Supreme Court mooted it at several fora that we should look for dressing outside wig and gown. But there has not been any agreement on whether it will be an ‘agbada’ or the southern type of dressing. That has been on the burner and we’ve not concluded. As the legal profession is today, the mode of dressing remains as we’ve imbibed it and it has not changed. It is an unwritten precedence which has lasted decades, since 1960. It will however surprise anybody if someone decided to change the dressing overnight. If it will change, it will take a whole lot of process. Amosa went for five years training, abiding by this process. Would it be that second that you will be called and handed a certificate for your five years training that you want to enforce the change? To me, it smells of so many things. There is a body she could have complained to but she never wrote a memoranda complaining about the issue. This nation follows rule of law, there is a saying, ‘when there is a right, there must be a remedy, but the right has not been presented. Agreed, there is freedom of religion but has her called to bar removed the wearing of hijab for life or taken her religion away from her? It is an issue of law not religion, we should not mingle law with religion or moral.
Sulyman Jabata, Principal of Sulyman Jabata & Co.
Nigerian citizens have the right to choose religion of their choice. Section 38 (1)(2) is very extant on this. Decision of the court, in the case of Bashirat Vs. College of Education, Ilorin, the court handed down a decision that a lady who has chosen to wear Nicob should be allowed to write her examination. It further stated that she should not be prevented from entering the examination hall but should be subjected to scrutiny if the school feels that she’s not acting in a manner expected of a student during the examination. In the case of Amosa, she had decided to wear something underneath the wig, in that wise, she should not be prevented from enjoying the benefit of been call to bar like her other colleagues. If the court of Appeal has spoken, the High court of Abuja cannot upturn the decision. It will amount to judicial rascality. Similar cases were decided in Lagos, Osun and in many other places. I want to suggest that we should find a way of amending the law. Law is dynamic the society is moving and we should find a way of moving along. The religion of Islam has prescribed the way and manner a lady should dress and if it cannot be sustained, it will amount to a denial.
Imam Temim, Practising lawyer at Titilayomi Chambers
By the virtue of the constitution, I’m entitled to practice my religion by wearing hijab. Hijab is part of my religion. A good Muslim will never leave her hair opened, I cannot because I want to practise law and jettison my religion. That recent development by the court in Abuja prohibiting the use of hijab, to me is not a welcome one. It is just a way of depriving one. If we have to wear what is required of us as Muslim, it won’t be this small hijab but full one. We abided by this because of our country and the way the profession was handed over to us. In what way has the veil affected the profession, to me, there is no correlations. Catholic sister uses white veil, nobody ever complained about that. I see this as a way of attacking the Muslims. The judiciary and other concerned bodies should review the constitution.
Muhammed Yusuf, Practising at Moses Ibiyemi Chambers
I cannot remember since the last 18 years when I stand with my hijab removed except that day when I was called to bar. That day was supposed to be my happiest moment, but I was saddled with mix feelings. I was not happy and I wasn’t sad; but I knew something had gone wrong with me. In my dressing, you cannot pick out anything that is odd. The fact that we get the dressing style from the white doesn’t mean we should practice it all. I will speak with my month, not my open hair. I don’t see any reason for the new directive by the Abuja High court. If there will be any prohibition in dressing, it should be the dressing of the engineers that should be barred or that of the medical doctors. The doctors wear their lab coat with big hijab on it. It is painful we don’t have people at the helm of affairs who are ready to fight for us, maybe because their children are not victims. Imagine, forcing a member of a Deeper Life church to wear mini skirt. The prohibition is contradicting the provision of the constitution. As against what some people were saying, the issue has to do with religion.
AbdulKareem Adebimpe, DPP, Ministry of Justice
There is nothing limiting her to dress the way she had dressed. There is freedom of religion. And whatever is divine in a religion must be regarded as sacred. The action of the High court sitting in Abuja was a directive not a judgement. The matter is in Appeal.
Prince Oluwaseun Ijaodola, Principal of Ijaodola Chambers
Obviously, the proponent are jokers. They don’t understand what is called fundamental human right. It is not just a right but the one that is fundamental to ones existence. Being a lawyer is not fundamental, you have liberty to do that. Liberty is created by section 35 of the constitution and that precedes section 38, right to religion. I’m a Christian and of the Cherubic settings, we wear garment which is far different from what any other church wears. Because my religion permits me to wear white garment and my regalia to church, can I now wear that to court? Can I impose that on a profession which I have voluntarily sworn to abide by its rules and dictates? It’s not a must I read law, and if I want to do so, I must stand by the law of the legal profession. I so much believe those supporting Amosa or kicking against court directive are acting a script and they are bound to fail. I’m a prince by birth, it is not customary of me to refer to a person as my Lord, a judge could come from a slave background but once I appear before him, I have to reference him as my lord. That is what the profession demands of me. The rule of the profession cannot be subjected because of my personal belief. Those that wear hijabs to court here are laying bad precedence and such is mainly in operative at the Kwara state High court. A lawyer was denied appearance recently in Lagos because he was not properly dressed. In Amosa case, it is obvious, she was not supposed to be called at all in this life because she’s not fit and proper. I’m disappointed in the NBA President, Balarape Mahmoud SAN who claimed that her daughter was called to bar with hijab, the question is, was her daughter called in Nigeria? Even, the popular Ilorin cleric who vowed that her daughter will be called with hijab, let’s wait till then and see.
