Certificación

CHAPTER SIX

It was noted that the ancient Hausa land was so notorious with corruption, highhandedness, impunity, injustice and other social malaise that in 1804, Usman dan Fodio initiated a jihad that over ran almost the entire Hausa land and established the Sokoto Caliphate where sharia law was introduced. A law that was supposed to have provided the alternative of the corrupt Hausa land before the jihad. He thought of a place where justice, equity and equality before the law should be instituted. Upon the entrance of the British colonialists in the region in 1903, the Sharia introduced by Usman dan Fodio suffered some set back as it went through modifications to suit the British judicial system. In January 1914, the then southern and northern protectorates (comprising mainly the Sokoto Caliphate) were amalgamated. After series of struggles, Nigeria gained independence in October 1960 and the modification of Sharia continued even into the postcolonial era. However, about one hundred and seventy three (173) years after the jihad and seventeen (17) years after the country’s independence, the agitations for the implementation of sharia resurfaced especially during the 1977/1978 Constitutional Conference. One hundred and seventy eight (178) years after the Usman Fodio’s jihad, twenty-two (22) years after Nigerian independence from Britain and five (5) years after the heated Constitutional Conference, there were violent confrontations that took place between a jihadist sect known as “Maitatsine” and the Nigerian Police Force in Kano on 18^th December 1980. The violence escalated to other parts of the northern Nigeria and the agitations of jihad and Sharia have since continued. After the Maitatsine onslaughts, the orgy of killings in the name of implementing sharia came up between 1999 and 2004, another deadly group known as Boko Haram surfaced. Like other similar groups, Boko Haram became an outgrowth of the Maitatsine riots of the 1980s. Westerlund (1996) argues that all these groups cannot be understood without

understanding first the 1804 Usman dan Fodio’s jihad because these groups draw their inspirations from Usman dan Fodio (p.69).

Meanwhile, many reasons have been adduced as the causes of the 1804 Usman dan Fodio’s war hence debates concerning the Sharia which he aimed at introducing and its relationship with the customary, colonial or national law have been unwanted permanent features on the Nigerian socio-political and religious arena in the past two hundred (200) years. Initially, the jihad and Sharia movements claimed to be declarations of loyalty and adherence to Islam but the issues in Nigeria are complex and full of misunderstandings because what started as a movement to purify Islam often developed or degenerated into a full-scale war of conquest against non-Muslims. Again, some political and wealthy classes employ both jihad and sharia for selfish reasons and other parochial interests.

In view of the above, the aims of embarking on these religious exercises usually end in fiasco. These political and religious mixtures have given rise to the emergence of militants who have made the state to crumble. Thus, Nigerian Islam becomes heterogeneous with the springing up of many Islamic sects that have resorted to the use of violence in a bid to realizing their ambitions on the wider Islamic and Nigerian populations. These sects often claimed to be in opposition to the traditional Nigerian Islamic teachings of the Sufi brotherhood and they gradually alienate themselves from the main Islamic body. These jihad and sharia movements have many things in common. For instance, they are often anti government or state authority that did not emanate from them, they have their autonomous enclaves from where they operated, they organized charismatic sermons against the use of western items and they had links with some politicians. Usually, the state authorities erroneously think that the death of the leaders of these militant groups in the hands of the state security agencies will mark the end of the sects. But to

their chagrins, after the demise of their leaders, more ferocious sects often metamorphosed and emerged. From them emanate self-appointed Imams, preachers, scholars or teachers who lead their campaigns to enforce sharia and establish an Islamic state in Nigeria. They mobilize and seek legitimacy by criticizing the political Islamic establishment, pointing out the corrupt nature of sharia as implemented by the politically motivated sharia states and portray themselves as genuine Islamic reformers. Repeatedly, the unhealthy fallouts from these groups have been the use of violence in communicating their messages and registering their demands. They alienate, antagonize and turn Nigeria into a religious battleground. They pitch Muslims against Muslims and Muslims against Christians and other religious minorities.

Therefore, because they look up to the 1804 Usman dan Fodio’s jihad for their campaigns, it is thus observed that the same 1804 Usman dan Fodio’s jihad has taken various forms, names, dimensions, methods and have grown into other deadly, worrying and dangerous movements in modern day Nigeria. Similar to Usman dan Fodio’s 1804 jihad, the latest metamorphoses of the war, Boko Haram has overran the northeastern parts and at some points established caliphates in many local government areas of the zone. The activities of these sects have posed serious implications for the corporeality of Nigeria. They have brought about unwanted developments to the Nigerian stability, disrupting her cohesion with the enthronement of violence as a means to an end. They have been serving as a platform for political realization and made Nigeria especially the northern part to be synonymous with violence.