Conversation with Governor Sani Ahmed

By 

Levi Obijiofor

We have often heard about how ordinary Nigerians conspire to give their country a bad image. Now some public officials have joined in. Add to that list Governor Sani Ahmed of Zamfara State, the fire-spitting, self-appointed, sole messenger of God. Ever since he introduced Sharia law in Zamfara, every official pronouncement or action from that government has tended to depict Nigeria as a medieval state in Africa. Governor Ahmed has been making prodigious noise about his commitment to Sharia law and his determination to spread his religious zealotry across the nation. The international community heard him and ever since has been seeking to understand the forces that drive Governor Ahmed.

Twice in the past one year, the Australian Broadcasting Corporation television (ABC) TV) current affairs programme "Foreign Correspondent" has thrown its spotlight on the problems confronting Nigeria and the Obasanjo government. But the particular programme that really caught my fancy was a special focus on Zamfara State and its brand of Sharia law. In this programme, reporter Mark Corcoran was given a raw deal in Nigeria by the state secret service. But that's a completely different story. Before the ABC TV team departed Nigeria, they were granted an interview by Governor Sani Ahmed of Zamfara State. The interview, extracts of it, was insightful for what it revealed about Ahmed's brand of Islamic piety, his religious ambition and his arguments for installing Sharia law in Zamfara. Some of his views were as indefensible as they lacked logic.

Reporter: "Do you think Nigeria should become a Sharia nation?"

Governor Ahmed: "Thats my ambition and thats the ambition of every Moslem within this country."

Governor Ahmed got it wrong. He can speak for himself but he certainly cant speak for every Moslem in Nigeria. Indeed there are Moslems who are critical of and uncomfortable with Ahmeds uncompromising utterances regarding the Islamic religious faith. When the reporter asked if the imposition of Sharia law was not the catalyst that sparked inter-ethnic and inter-religious riots in northern states especially in Kaduna State last year, Governor Ahmed offered this lousy explanation.

Governor Ahmed: "I dont think it is the reason why there was the crisis, particularly in Kaduna. Sharia was never the reason. You see, most of it are communal and tribal clashes, political and social interests of different groups of people who happen to be Moslems and Christians, not because of Sharia."

Reporter: "And youre prepared to order the beheading of people if they commit an offence?"

Governor Ahmed: "Yes, that is the dictate of Sharia. All Moslems know about it."

Reporter: "Whats happened to the crime rate here since you introduced Sharia?"

Governor Ahmed: "In fact, its virtually no crime. Its crime-free because the percentage of crime, compared to what obtained before Sharia, I think over 90 per cent has been eradicated completely."

Governor Ahmeds argument is simply illogical. The absence of an official crime figure does not mean crime has been "eradicated," to use the governors word. More than anything else, the presence of Sharia law could have helped drive crime underground but it is not the same to say the state is virtually crime free. There are many illegal activities that are still carried out surreptitiously. Governor Ahmed and his Sharia enforcers will continue to live in a state of illusion in the belief that the state is crime-free.

Governor Ahmed: "You see, if you want to know what Sharia is all about, the true model of Sharia, you go to Saudi Arabia. Saudi Arabia is the country, the number one country in the world that is implementing Sharia according to Islamic rules and regulations."

Reporter: "So, is Saudi Arabia a role model for you?"

Governor Ahmed: Yea, that is our role model."

Reporter: (repeats a previous question): "Do you think Nigeria should become a Sharia nation?

Governor Ahmed: "Thats my ambition and thats the ambition of every Moslem within this country. We want Sharia to be implemented for all Moslems in Nigeria while the Christian will be governed by the common law."

Reporter: Christians watching this in Nigeria will be angered by that kind of thing you just said there."

Governor Ahmed (grinning): "How will they be angered? Thats my own opinion. I am entitled to my own opinion as a democratic society."

By the face of it, Governor Ahmed seems to admit that his version of Sharia law is indeed a counterfeit of what obtains in Saudi Arabia. Coming from a man who wants to be seen as the leading disciple of Sharia law, you would expect he would go for the real thing, the type he dreams about in Saudi Arabia. But then, an ambition, like a dream, is free. When Ahmed makes reference to freedom of opinion in a democratic society, he contradicts the very principle his government has been denying other non-Moslems in Zamfara State. People of other religious faiths should be allowed to freely express their views and also choose to be tried under common law when they commit an offence. Governor Ahmed cherishes freedom of opinion but his government has not granted the people in his state the same freedom to live, interact with other people and practise their religion freely without harassment and intimidation. It is true that people do not eat religion. However, religion has often proved to be the opium of a great many people.

Riots and demonstrations in Zamfara and neighbouring Sharia last year failed to douse the fire of religious revivalism in Governor Ahmed. Last year, a young man in Zamfara who was convicted for stealing cattle joyfully submitted his right arm for amputation ñ in accordance with the tenets of Zamfaras version of Sharia law ñ and promptly checked himself into hospital for recuperation. The world watched in astonishment. No one knew how far the governor was determined to go in his crusade. As Nigerians recently found out, the worst was to come sooner than later.

A few weeks ago a teenage girl had to submit herself to public caning. Her offence? She slept with a gadfly that she could not identify and the result was pregnancy. Of course, pre-marital sex is a serious offence in many religious doctrines but it is the nature of punishment reserved for such an offence that offended the good sense of the international community. First the Canadian government expressed disgust at what Governor Ahmed and his followers had outlined for the teenage girl. This protest was brushed aside. Next the European Union shouted in protest. And the Australian government made its objection known to the Nigerian authorities. None of these official protest moved Governor Ahmed and his Sharia enforcers.

By subjecting the teenage girl to over 100 strokes of the cane, Zamfara State succeeded in elevating Nigeria, post-military regime, to a country where gross human rights abuses are still rife, even as Justice Chukwudifu Oputa and his human rights commission listen to gory tales of human rights abuses by past Nigerian governments. Human rights abuses are taking place in Zamfara and no one has considered dragging Governor Ahmed and his government to the panel. This raises the question: When is a human right abuse no longer an abuse? Is it when the perpetrators are still in office or when they have left office.?