THE PROPOSED GENDER APARTHEID POLICY IN KANO STATE IN THE NAME OF RELIGION: IMPLICATIONS FOR NATIONAL UNITY.

By  Ogiri John Ogiri

According to the Mobile version of Merriam Webster’s Dictionary (2019), apartheid is a former social system in South Africa in which black people and people from other racial groups did not have the same political and economic rights as white people and was forced to live separately from the white. The first time the word “apartheid” was used was in the 19^th century precisely around 1947.  It became more popular from then onward in the Southern African area when the occupying Dutch settlers introduced the policy in South Africa. The policy, among other things, established and encouraged deliberate segregation between the Dutch White settlers and indigenous black South Africans. For instance, some areas were solely reserved for white with other areas designated black areas. According to Daron Acemoglu and James Robinson in their Economic Origins of Dictatorship and Democracy published in 2006 by the Cambridge University Press in New York, “the government attempted to move all Africans into eight (then ten) homelands, and only Africans whose labor was needed in the white economy could be present in “European areas.” They had to carry “passes,” proving that they were legally outside of the tribal areas”. The authors further argued that the apartheid regime was sustained by massive infringements on political and civil rights.

The many evils of apartheid provoked protests, demonstrations and strikes by the indigenous black population under the assemblage of African National Congress (ANC). The public condemnations and outcries that later flowed from the international community was loud and clear-apartheid was unwelcome. A combination of several events was to finally pave the way for the eventual decline and collapse of the apartheid regime and policy in the 1990s. Ever since then, Africa has not witnessed the nature and severity of the kind of apartheid policy that was experimented in the Southern Africa.

However, in the 21^st century when the world is gradually consolidating on the gains of technological innovations in a globalized world to create a more humane and united society far detached from what used to obtain in a barbaric society, by removing every trace of discriminations on the basis of race, colour, creed and gender, some elements in some  Nigeria’s northern States are frantically reversing these gains by coming up with divisive and segregating religious policies that can only take the nation 100 years backward.  This time around, it is a gender cum religious apartheid. A week before Christmas, Nigerians had a rude awakening to the announcement of a proposed controversial religious law by the Kano State government led by His Excellency, Alhaji Abdullahi Ganduje that, effective from January, 2020, men and women, female and male, boys and girls would be prohibited from travelling in the same tricycle popularly known “Keke” in Kano metropolis and its countryside. The planned law prescribed certain corporal punishments and some jail terms for the would-be violators and it would be enforced by the Kano State Islamic Police, the “Hisbah” Police. According to the Guardian Newspaper, “The state government had said beginning from January 1, 2020, opposite sex riding on the same tricycle, without a proven relationship would be arrested. Speaking at the close of the 77th annual Islamic Vacation Course (IVC), organised by Zone A Muslim Students’ Society of Nigeria (MSSN), held at Bayero University, Kano, the Commander General, Kano State Hisbah Board, Sheikh Mohammad Ibn-Sina, who represented Governor Abdullahi Umar Ganduje, disclosed that it was intended to uphold Islamic values as a Sharia-compliant state.”  (The Guardian, 27^th December,2019)

 Now this is coming at a time when the most conservative Islamic country, Saudi Arabia has begun to come up with progressive religious policies while relaxing some hitherto conservative Islamic rules to accommodate modern realities. According to the New York Times of September,27 2019, “Saudi Arabia is one of the most conservative countries in the world, adhering to a strict interpretation of Islam, and is considered as particularly harsh to women who are seen as breaking religious rules.” However, Saudi Arabia has lifted some restrictions on women traveling in the ultraconservative Muslim kingdom, its tourism authority said, with new guidelines allowing women to rent hotel rooms without a male guardian’s presence, and foreign men and women to share a room without proof of marriage. The easing of stringent regulations governing social interactions comes after Riyadh launched its first tourist visa scheme, as part of efforts to open up the country to foreign visitors and diversify its oil-reliant economy. (See AFP report of October 6^th 2019). Is Kano State government not thinking about doing the same?

If one may ask, will the law equally apply to faithfuls of other religions in Kano State? Will the interest and faith of people of other religions be protected in the proposed law? Will the governor provide tricycles to be solely operated by women to convey women? Will a separate airport, shopping mall, market, office, school and road be provided for each of the genders? How can those mandated to enforce such a law identify members of same family without infringing on their fundamental human rights as protected in the Nigeria’s1999 constitution?  Is this law subject to the national constitution? Will it be enforced in its own right or in subservience to the sacred provisions of the 1999 constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria as amended? Providing answers to the above questions is fundamental to the core of our national unity.

IMPLICATIONS FOR NATIONAL UNITY

Beginning from 1914 when the northern and southern protectorates were amalgamated into one political and economic entity called Nigeria through 1960 when she became independent and 1963 when she became a republic up till today, the country has continuously beamed her searchlight on the whereabouts of unity.  Many billions of naira have been expended on various initiatives by successive administrations to foster national unity. Examples of such initiatives include but not limited to the establishment of the National Youth Service Corps (NYSC), the Federal Character Commission, the Federal Unity Colleges etc. Unfortunately, the more she searches for unity, the further her foundation drifts apart thanks to the deliberate violation of the principles of federalism by some government elements in the country.

At the risk of sounding immodest, one can argue that a gender apartheid policy wrapped in suspicious Islamic attires as obtainable in Kano State  and a few other States in northern Nigeria can only help the foundation of our nationhood to drift further apart. In a country where there is a constitution protecting the fundamental human rights of citizens, it is dangerous for national unity when we have States in the same federation coming up with laws that apparently offend the people’s rights to free religion and association. Nigeria as it is currently constituted and populated cannot have a state religion. It can only exist as the secular state it is supposed to be. Any attempt to impose a single religion on any part of the country can only serve to puncture our unity.  Unity cannot occur in an environment populated by elements who make the pursuit of the supremacy of their religion a government policy. It should be remembered that Nigeria is a multi-ethnic and multi-cultural society with over 250 ethnic groups speaking over 400 ethnic or indigenous languages.

Further more, the kind of Islamic gender apartheid policy being pursued in Kano state and some other States in northern Nigeria can only help to make louder, the agitations for freedom from religious oppression and subjugations by people who do not share the same belief with Muslims in the country. The end product of these agitations can show in our subsequent disintegration (God forbid). Only recently, the United States placed Nigeria on the watch list of those countries with serious violation of religious freedom and tolerance. Many prominent Nigerians of northern Islamic extractions disagreed with the new name tag by the US. But what other examples do the US need to believe so when shortly after the name tag, the Kano State government came up with another archaic policy of deliberate gender segregation along religious line? It is obvious some people do not want to help unite the country.

Finally, this latest religious cum gender apartheid policy in Kano state can become an incendiary for further religious conflicts between Muslims and other religious faithfuls who do not share the Islamic policy of separating the male from the female. Nigeria has had enough troubles dealing with dangerous consequences of religious fanaticism and banditry in the northeast and some parts of the northwest. We have already lost good and brave men to insurgency fueled mainly by religious fanaticism in the northeast. So, the least we expect from Kano State government is to create more enabling environment for insurgency to thrive.

CONCLUSION AND THE WAY FORWARD

This piece takes a position against the proposed gender cum religious segregation law in Kano State billed to go into effect in January 2020. The law is therefore seen as another gender apartheid policy in the guise of religion that should be discouraged with every legal means possible to avert any dangerous consequence in its implementation in the future. Introduction of Sharia law in an environment where everybody is not a Muslim and where Muslims even have different understandings of Sharia and its implementation is risky. We have seen how a similar religious adventure, in the past, by the then Zamfara State government under the leadership of Senator Ahmed Sani Yerima resulted in the death of thousands of men, women and children across Zamfara state, Kaduna and Kano State. Both sides lost good men, women and children to the “inferno” that ensued in the wake of the introduction and enforcement of Sharia laws in the state. I do not subscribe to a repeat of such an unfortunate state of affairs.

As a way forward therefore, it is advised that the Kano State government suspend such a policy and instead evolve and pursue policies that will be inclusive of all and sundry, or the ones that gives everybody a sense of belonging and accommodation.

Furthermore, the poverty level among those from the lower rung of the social ladder in the state, (for whom, I believe this law is meant for) is too glaring for the government to ignore in favour of the pursuit of an adventurous religious policy that can further widen the gap of brotherhood between Muslims and other religious faithfuls in the state. According to Sanusi M.M. & Denis D.M. (2015), It is justifiable to conclude that the landscape of poverty in Kano State is not evenly distributed over space and households do not have equal access to economic and infrastructural services. (Sanusi M.M. & Denis D.M. (2015) Geographies of Poverty in Kano State: The role of GIS in Identifying and Mapping Multidimensionally Deprived Households. The Journal of Geography and Geology.)

The government should therefore come up with economic policies that can better the lives of every inhabitant of Kano State. More economic empowerment programmes should be introduced and implemented by the government to help, particularly, the unemployed and the vulnerable to be self-reliant and hence happy. A hungry and angry man does not always shout “Allahu Akbar” for the right reason.

Almost as a corollary, the Kano State government should not allow itself to be distracted by its obsession with religious supremacism. Rather, it should leave the propagation of Islam to the Sheiks and Imams in the mosque and focus more on building infrastructure of good and accessible roads, quality education, particularly in science and technology, efficient healthcare delivery system as well as a reliable security system across the length and breadth of Kano State. The cost and the potential of building a sustainable infrastructure will eventually outweigh the benefit of introducing and enforcing an adventurous religious policy of deliberate segregation along gender line, which, in the 21^st century, is gradually becoming archaic, unpopular and unsustainable.

Finally, the most enduring solution to the problems of this country is a return to true federalism. We should have a system in which each geo-political zone or region is allowed some measures of autonomy, developing at their own pace while paying taxes to the centre. They should be able to come up with laws that suit their unique culture and historical experience. It has become imperative that we restructure the current structure which is no longer sustainable to meet the current realities of our nation. One zone cannot be having a different law, having their people tried in a different court while another zone is expected to be guided by the national constitution that the other zone no longer obeys and falls subservient to, and expects that we can live in unity.
We should go back and resurrect and resuscitate the independence constitution commonly agreed to by Dr Nnamdi Azikiwe, Chief Obafemi Awolowo and Sir Ahmadu Bello. Our solution lies in that constitution. Regionalism can still help resolve our current nationhood imbroglio.