By Kayode Ketefe
There are a number of
things that are wrong with the 1999 Constitution, even as amended. The only
amendments we have had so far relate to the electoral reforms and recognition of
National Industrial Court as a superior court of record.
None of the much more
important human rights issues like the enforceability of socio-economic rights,
women’s rights, and removal of certain obnoxious provisions from the constitution
has seen the light of the day.
Specifically, this writer
has written series on why many provisions of the constitution are violative of women’s
rights and the imperative for amendment, but none of these, like the agitations
of the larger civil society, has till date swayed the lawmakers.
For example, Section 29
of the constitution which makes provisions on renunciation of Nigeria’s
citizenship features in its Subsection 4 (b) a rather discriminatory proviso
that “any woman who is married shall be deemed to be of full age”.
The implication of this
is that the Constitution indirectly recognises child marriage as it bestows
legal capacity of an adult to any girl that is married even if she just nine
years of age!
Besides, the provision is
also discriminatory as there is no such presumption of adulthood for boys and
thus this is contrary to section 42 of the same Constitution which forbids
discrimination on the grounds of sex, among others. The agitations of
many human rights groups for the removal of
this obnoxious clause have hitherto been ignored.
this obnoxious clause have hitherto been ignored.
Then, there came a ray of
hope when the Senate Committee on the Constitutional Review recently
recommended the removal of the offensive section. We also heard the
cheering news that the Plenary Senate session had approved the expurgation of
the section with 75
votes (which was even two votes more than the necessary two-thirds requirement, that is 73 votes).
votes (which was even two votes more than the necessary two-thirds requirement, that is 73 votes).
But all of a sudden,
there was a legislative abracadabra as the Senate revisited the issue and
conducted fresh voting where it could no longer obtain two-thirds necessary
votes to effect the amendment of the section! We were told that the
reason for this unusual legislative procedure was that one Senator Ahmad Sani
Yerima raised objection that the removal of the section would be against the
tenets of Islam.
In a nutshell, the Senate
was stuck with status quo ante and could not expunge the controversial proviso.
Contrary to the submission of Yerima which actuated the Senate to erroneously beat a legislative retreat, many informed
scholars on Islamic jurisprudence have insisted that Islam never sanctions
marrying off under-age girls.
For example, a human
rights activist and the wife of the former Chief Justice of Nigeria, Mrs.
Maryam Uwais, has said there is nothing in Islam that supports the under-age
marriage. She said “Contrary to the position conveyed by the Senator from
Zamfara, there is certainly no unanimity of positions on such contemporary
matters of social interaction, within Islamic jurists or the various Schools of
Thought.
Surely where there is ‘silence in the texts’ (i.e. primary sources) or
lack of unanimity as regards a particular practice, that opening allows for a
society to determine for itself what is in its best interest (maslaha), in its
own context.”
Human societies have over
the age treated practical existentialist contingencies with diverse
responses. The culture of marrying off underage girls and polygamy are all
emanations of the same cultural and sociological factors. In the olden
days when many societies engaged in numerous adventures that were perilous to
the male population like seafaring and warfare, there invariably followed
disproportion in male-female statistics in such societies.
Thus, a demographic problem
of superfluous female population ensued, necessitating expedient responses like
polygamy to take care of the extra women. The culture of child marriage became
an offshoot of polygamy after the latter had became entrenched in order to
ensure constant supply of marriageable material to support polygamy!
Today, modernity has
helped many societies to root out the accumulated behaviours spawned by past
expediencies, but there are enough ignoramuses among us who would insist child
marriage is our culture! We now know that there are a lot of physical, health,
psychological and even economic reasons why young girls should not be married
off at tender age.
Many civilised countries specifically
stipulate the age of attainment of adulthood and the attendant capacity to
marriage to be 18 or 21 while others leave it, supposedly to the informed and
moral decision of their populaces.
Frankly, a girl
undergoing pubertal changes is ill-adapted to strenuous conditions of gestation
and this often cause physical and emotional damage to the young woman.
The arising complications
may also cause infant mortality, morbidity, the dreaded Vesicovaginal fistula
or even death. Besides, rushing young girls into marital responsibilities at a
time they should learn a trade, get formal education or be indentured to a vocation would result in economic deprivations
of these youngsters later in life.
Their counterparts who have made a more
auspicious opportunity cost of their time would be economically empowered and busy
counting money while the deprived girls keep counting babies!
Certainly, history would
not be fair to those Senators who saw the opportunity to improve the lots of
their endangered compatriots and allowed it to pass by.

No comments:
Post a Comment