Tuesday, December 9, 2025 - A Bauchi traditional leader and custodian of the Danmalikin Bauchi title, Aminu Danmaliki, has stated that that the practice of Sharia law in Northern Nigerian states poses no threat to Christians or Christianity.
Speaking to journalists on Sunday, Dec. 7, Danmaliki said
those interpreting Sharia as a danger to non-Muslims “are either misinformed or
ignorant of its true concept,” insisting that the Islamic legal system has no
jurisdiction over individuals who are not Muslims.
He claimed a group of Christian activists recently made an
attempt to discredit Sharia before a joint session of the American Congress and
this has “revived an old, unfounded debate driven mostly by fear,
misinformation, and political motives.”
He said: “Not too long ago, the same individuals went to the
US Congress and falsely alleged that genocide was being carried out against
Christians in Nigeria. While they failed in that attempt to turn the world
against Nigerian Muslims, they would also fail in this renewed crusade against
Islam and Sharia law.”
Danmaliki said that Sharia law is constitutionally protected
and remains an integral part of governance that Muslims desire.
He added: “Let it be known that we Muslims shall never
accept a governance system in Nigeria without Sharia, which has nothing to do
with Christians and is fully recognised by the Nigerian Constitution.”
He argued that Sharia is neither foreign nor extreme, adding
that its influence can be traced in the development of Western legal
traditions.
Citing the works of legal scholars such as John Makdisi,
Danmaliki noted that several English common-law institutions were adapted from
Islamic jurisprudence through Norman interactions with Muslim Sicily.
He said: “These parallels do not exist in Roman law, Canon
law, or Anglo-Saxon traditions. Their closest match is Islamic law.
“If Sharia were inherently unjust, why would medieval
England adopt some of its principles?”
Danmaliki also referenced early American scholarships that
regarded Sharia as a sophisticated legal system.
He cited the 1894 U.S. Supreme Court ruling in U.S. v.
Addams, where the court referenced legal scholars who described Islamic law as
rational, humane, and protective of civil liberties. He added that 19th- and
early 20th-century U.S. congressional publications acknowledged Islamic law’s
contributions to the protection of minorities, contractual rights, constraints
on arbitrary rule, and judicial integrity.
“In short, the United States once regarded Sharia not as a
threat but as a respected legal civilisation,” he said.
Danmaliki insisted that in Nigeria, Sharia is not imposed on
Christians and has no legal force over them.
“Sharia in Nigeria applies only to Muslims. This is
guaranteed by the Constitution and by state legislation,” he claimed.
Danmaliki added that "non-Muslims can not be tried
under Sharia criminal law, non-Muslims cannot be compelled to appear in Sharia
courts, and non-Muslims have full access to secular courts.”
He pointed out that many Christians voluntarily subscribe to
Sharia courts in cases involving Muslims because the process is faster and
perceived to be less corrupt, maintaining that, “Sharia strengthens—not
weakens—Nigeria’s unity.”
Danmaliki argued further that Nigeria already operates a
multi-legal system—common law, customary law, and Sharia—and that each serves
the communities that believe in them.
“This is multiculturalism, not division,” he said, adding
that Sharia continues to thrive because it delivers justice, not because it is
imposed.
He concluded that the enduring value of Sharia lies in its
foundational principles of justice, equity, due process, protection of life and
property, accountability for leaders, and fairness in commercial dealings.
“These values shaped civilisations. They shaped English law.
They shaped American legal thought. And they continue to shape millions of
lives in Nigeria,” he said.
0 Comments