From Obas to Imams: How Yorubaland Became the New Frontline of Nigeria’s Sharia War
Sharia Is for Muslims”: Nigeria’s Legal Contradiction, Yoruba Muslim Agitations, and the Growing Clash of Faith, Tradition, and Constitutional Rights
Nigeria remains one of the most complex nations in the world when it comes to identity, religion, law, and governance. It is a country attempting to hold together multiple ethnicities, belief systems, and legal traditions under a single constitutional framework. Yet, many critics argue that this attempt has produced not harmony, but confusion—a confusion that, if left unresolved, may eventually consume everyone involved.
At the heart of this debate is the coexistence of two fundamentally different legal systems within one sovereign state: secular constitutional law and Islamic Sharia law. To many observers, these systems are not merely different but diametrically opposed in philosophy, enforcement, and worldview. Expecting seamless and peaceful coexistence, critics argue, is unrealistic and dangerously naïve.
Others, however, insist that this coexistence is not only possible but constitutionally guaranteed—particularly when Sharia is restricted to Muslims who willingly submit to it. This tension has once again resurfaced sharply in South-West Nigeria, following a strongly worded intervention by a Yoruba Muslim group.
The Broader Sharia Debate in Nigeria
Nigeria’s experience with Sharia law is not new. Since 1999, several northern states have adopted full or partial Sharia legal systems, particularly for civil and personal matters involving Muslims. Over the years, critics have linked these Sharia-governed states with worsening poverty indices, persistent insecurity, sectarian violence, and human rights concerns, while supporters insist these problems stem from governance failures, not Islamic law itself.
Empirical data from development agencies and security reports consistently show that many Sharia-implementing states in northern Nigeria rank among the poorest in the country, with high rates of unemployment, insurgency, and communal violence. This reality has fueled skepticism among Nigerians who fear that expanding Sharia frameworks—especially into religiously plural regions—could deepen divisions rather than resolve them.
It is against this backdrop that recent developments in Yorubaland must be understood.
Yoruba Muslim Group Issues Stern Warning
A group operating under the name Yoruba Muslims for Freedom (YMF) has issued a public warning to traditional rulers (Obas) and what it described as Christian bigots, urging them to desist from interfering in Islamic religious affairs across Yorubaland.
Speaking to journalists on Monday evening, the group’s spokesman, Mr. Lateef Akinwale, stated unequivocally that Sharia is strictly an Islamic matter and has nothing to do with Christians or traditional religion practitioners.
According to him, “Christians and idol worshippers have nothing whatsoever to do with Shari’a. They must immediately stop spreading falsehoods and allow Muslims to live freely, as guaranteed by the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.”
Claims of Marginalisation in Yorubaland
Mr. Akinwale argued that Muslims in Yorubaland have endured decades of marginalisation, which he described as deliberate and systemic.
> “Muslims have been marginalised in Yorubaland for far too long. We can no longer remain silent in the face of this shameless tyranny, oppression, marginalisation, and artificial impoverishment.”
The group further claimed that despite Muslims allegedly constituting approximately 70 percent of the Yoruba population, they have been denied what they describe as their full religious rights by a “tiny but influential Christian minority.”
According to YMF, this imbalance has translated into exclusion from religious recognition, institutional support, and the ability to freely practice Islamic legal traditions—particularly Sharia panels for civil dispute resolution.
Sharia Panels as a Constitutional Right
Central to the group’s agitation is the demand for Sharia panels to adjudicate civil matters involving Muslims. The group insists this is not a privilege but a fundamental human right protected under Nigeria’s constitution, which guarantees freedom of religion and religious practice.
> “No governor—let alone a powerless traditional ruler—has the authority to stop Muslims from enjoying their constitutional rights,” Akinwale declared.
He stressed that Sharia panels, especially those handling non-criminal, voluntary civil matters, already exist in various parts of Nigeria and do not require executive approval to function informally. What the group seeks, however, is formal government recognition, including the establishment of courts, payment of judges, and institutional backing.
Direct Confrontation with Yoruba Traditional Rulers
One of the most controversial aspects of the statement was its direct challenge to Yoruba Obas. The group asserted that traditional rulers have no jurisdiction whatsoever over Islamic religious affairs.
> “Yoruba traditional rulers have no right to interfere in Islamic matters. We owe no allegiance to any Oba.”
The group went further, asserting that Muslims cannot submit to what they described as idol worship, insisting that their allegiance lies solely with Islamic leadership.
> “For Muslims, our Imams are our leaders. Obas should continue ruling their pagan subjects.”
Such statements have sparked concern among cultural analysts and community leaders, who warn that this rhetoric risks deepening religious fault lines in a region historically known for relative tolerance and coexistence.
Rejection of Traditional Authority
YMF also questioned the spiritual and moral legitimacy of Yoruba traditional institutions, describing them as rooted in beliefs they consider obsolete or non-existent.
> “The gods and spirits from which Obas claim legitimacy do not exist. As educated and civilised people, we reject such foundations.”
The group argued that it is unacceptable for individuals they described as “fetishistic” or “ritualistic” to claim leadership over Muslims, whom they say are guided by Islamic civilisation and law.
Plan to Appoint Town Imams Across Yorubaland
In a move that signals a significant shift in religious organisation, the group announced plans to appoint an Imam in every Yoruba town. According to them, these Imams would function as the recognized leaders of Muslims within their localities, independent of traditional rulership structures.
> “Idol worshippers should submit to their kings. We will submit to our Imams. To you is your religion, and to us is our religion and our freedom.”
The group clarified that these positions would not seek government recognition, describing the initiative as a self-driven effort to escape perceived oppression rather than a constitutional challenge.
Towards an Independent Sharia Court
When asked whether the agitation for Sharia panels would continue, the response was unequivocal.
> “There is no going back.”
YMF confirmed plans to collaborate with established Islamic bodies, including:
The Grand Mufti of Yorubaland
Muslim Ummah of South-West Nigeria (MUSWEN)
Jama’atu Nasril Islam (JNI)
NASFAT
Muslims Rights Concern (MURIC), Osun State
Together, they intend to launch what they call an Independent Sharia Court, aimed at formalizing Islamic civil adjudication for willing Muslims in the South-West.
A Nation at a Crossroads
This unfolding situation once again exposes Nigeria’s unresolved contradictions: a secular constitution, deeply religious populations, and multiple competing authorities—traditional, religious, and governmental.
While supporters frame the Yoruba Muslim agitation as a legitimate struggle for constitutional freedom, critics warn that the language, posture, and implications could undermine social cohesion, cultural heritage, and regional stability.
As Nigeria continues to juggle law, faith, and identity, one reality becomes increasingly clear: the question is no longer whether these tensions exist, but whether the country can manage them before confusion hardens into conflict.
0 Comments