Clarifying the Role of the Shari’a Court in Plateau State

I write as a concerned native of Plateau State, with deep familial ties and service history in this region. As the daughter of the late Grand Khadi of the Plateau State Sharia Court of Appeal, a man noted for his integrity and commitment to justice, I feel compelled to respond to recent remarks made by Mr. Dazen Dakup. His comments not only critique but also demean Plateau Muslims and misrepresent a crucial constitutional institution that has been a part of our state for many years.

It is disheartening yet necessary to address these claims. Plateau State Muslims are not outsiders, infiltrators, or agents of any hidden agenda. We are residents, raised within this land, who have long contributed to civil service, the judiciary, commerce, education, and the peaceful coexistence of our region. To repeatedly portray Plateau Muslims as menacing or illegitimate strips away our identity and historical narrative.

The Sharia Court of Appeal has not emerged recently, nor has it been forcibly imposed as a political or religious apparatus. It has been part of our societal framework for decades, existing well before today's political discourse. As someone who has observed its operations closely, I can attest that it has neither governed non-Muslims nor encroached upon the rights of others. Its authority is strictly limited to Islamic personal law, fully aligning with constitutional stipulations.

To associate this court with violence, extremism, or any notion of a “jihadist agenda” is not only incorrect but also irresponsible.

The turmoil faced in Plateau is intricate and rooted in multifaceted political, social, and identity conflicts—not attributable to a judicial entity that has resolved individual and familial matters without discord. Misusing religion in this context only revives past grievances and threatens the tenuous trust cultivated over many years.

Constructive criticism of governance is a hallmark of democracy. However, questioning the constitutionality of an institution recognized by law, simply because it serves Muslims, sends a perilous message. It implies that the rights of some citizens are acceptable only if they do not offend others.

Plateau State belongs to everyone—Christians, Muslims, and followers of various faiths. Our diversity has historically been a source of strength. As a native and a part of this state’s legal heritage, I am convinced that true peace cannot be realized through the demonization of lawful institutions or the profiling of entire communities; it can only be achieved through fairness, adherence to the constitution, and mutual respect.

At this pivotal time in our state's narrative, what Plateau requires is not divisive rhetoric, but healing communication. We must reject narratives that set neighbors against one another and instead dedicate ourselves to understanding, historical accuracy, and collective citizenship. For generations, Christians and Muslims have coexisted, traded, intermarried, and collaborated in governance within Plateau State. The future peace of our community hinges on how passionately we protect each other’s rights and foster understanding over suspicion, unity over fear.

Muslims advocating for their constitutional rights do not threaten Plateau State; they are exercising their citizenship.