• Says parents must provide haven for children in abusive marriages
• ‘Parents-in-law should know that their son’s wife is not called a “daughter in-law” as a mere formality‘

An Upper Customary of Kaduna State in Kafanchan has ruled that necessary support and guidance to a child who is married, especially when the marriage becomes toxic and life-threatening, is not an undue interference, while calling on parents not to turn a blind eye to wards facing domestic violence in their marriages.

The court, while delivering judgment in the marital dispute between Talatu Williams (Petitioner) and Williams Sunday (Respondent), commended Talatu’s mother, who eventually realised she should rather receive her daughter back than allow her to be killed in a violent marriage that had already harmed her physically and left her grandchildren emotionally battered.

Hear His Worship Emmanuel Samaila.

“We also wish to make two observations on parental responsibilities to their children. Firstly, providing necessary support and guidance to a child who has been given out in marriage, especially when the marriage becomes toxic and life-threatening, is not an undue interference. The Court notes with satisfaction that at the end of her testimony, the Petitioner’s mother (Pw1) came to the noble and humane realization that were her daughter to be killed in her marriage, the Respondent will remarry while she loses her child. As a matter of fact, after the departure of her daughter from her matrimonial home and even without divorcing her, the Respondent has remarried. It is hoped that parents will take care of their children and provide a safe haven for them at home especially when they are faced with domestic violence in their matrimonial homes.

“We would also want to state that the failure of the Respondent’s parents to take steps to act pursuant to the Petitioner’s distress call is despicable. The Petitioner narrated how she reached out to her in-laws when faced with their son’s brutality but was ignored as they never intervened to caution their son and admonish him to treat his wife with dignity and love. Parents in-law should know that their son’s wife is not called a “daughter in-law” as a mere formality but as an attestation to the fact that she has left her parents and is now directly under new parents who are expected to treat her not just as their son’s wife but also as a daughter. Would the Respondent’s parents be happy if the inhumane treatments meted on the Petitioner were done to their biological daughter? We do not think so. We also find the Respondent’s witnesses’ description of the Petitioner as having nothing when she was married as being disrespectful and distasteful. Do they know what she would have become in the society or what she would have had were her education not truncated after the Respondent impregnated her outside wedlock, especially seeing the business acumen she demonstrated?

“Secondly, we also observed from the evidence of Pw1, the Petitioner’s mother, that their non-interference in the plight of their daughter in her matrimonial home, despite the obvious and numerous acts of life threatening violence by the Respondent, appears to be borne out of a religious conviction. It is of note that even though God is said to hate divorce (Malachi 2:16), there is nowhere in the Holy Book that domestic violence is justified. Rather, the Bible requires husbands to love their wives just as Christ loves the church, an act that will naturally make their wives to submit without reservation. (Ephesians 5: 21-29)

“A deep seated conviction and belief in the God and the Bible is not a justification for turning a blind eye and burying one’s head in the sand like the proverbial ostrich. Marriage is an institution into which parents give their children out with the belief that they will build their homes with love and respect. It is also a union between two people who decided to take their affection for each other to a higher level. Would the parents of a woman allow and encourage their daughter to marry a man who will treat her with indignity and beat her as if she were a child? We do not think so. Even the Bible-inspired phrase drawn from Proverbs 13:14 says, “Spare the rod, spoil the child”, not “Spare the rod, spoil the wife.”

“If a suitor should tell a lady’s parents that after marrying their daughter he will no longer respect them and will subject their daughter to indignity and violence will they agree to give him their daughter? We do not think so. What kind of man will maltreat a woman even in the presence of her children? What manner of man will subject a woman to violence: a woman that has given birth to five children; a woman whose body handled ravaging and conflicting hormones five times during the nine months of pregnancies, each with its peculiarities; a woman who struggled to recover after each nursing and nurturing period for each of their five children; a woman who survived and recovered from a violence-induced miscarriage and most likely suffered from Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) and or depression after one or all her childbirths and all these within 20 years of marriage, the same period she still managed a business successfully to contribute to making their home financially stable?

“It is hoped that the Respondent will amend his ways and treat the women he takes as wives with dignity, love and respect. A spouse whose marriage has become toxic and life-threatening should know that it is okay to seek help and guidance because remaining in such a union, which may lead to their death, is not a virtue. They should always remember that being alive is more important than being in a toxic and life-threatening relationship where death is just a matter of time. Marriage is not a licence to treat another adult as one treats a child or a slave. The token paid by a man as bride price is not a purchase price which grants him ownership of the woman to deal with as he pleases and discard her as he wishes without consequences…”

Watch the video of Chief Mrs Victoria Awomolo, SAN, warning women to flee toxic relationships and stay alive.

Below is the full text of the judgment.

IN THE UPPER CUSTOMARY COURT OF KADUNA STATE

IN THE KAFANCHAN JUDICIAL DIVISION

HOLDEN AT KAFANCHAN

UCCK/CV/157/2023                                                              22^ND SEPTEMBER, 2024

BEFORE:

HIS WORSHIP EMMANUEL J. SAMAILA, ESQ.                      –           JUDGE

MR JAMES K. KAJANG                                                          –           MEMBER

BETWEEN

TALATU WILLIAMS                                                                        –           PETITIONER

AND

WILLIAMS SUNDAY                                                                      –           RESPONDENT

JUDGMENT

The parties got married over 20 years ago and lived together. The Petitioner gave birth to five children but only four are alive today. About two years ago, she returned to her parents’ house after she decided she will no longer endure the beatings she has been receiving from the Respondent. After taking several steps to get the Petitioner to provide for their children without success, she approached the Court. When this case commenced afresh in May 2024, her claims, as stated by her Counsel, Ambisa NJ Adze, Esq., are as follows:

1. The dissolution of the marriage conducted under Jaba custom and tradition.
2. The sum of N5million as a result of an apartment she built together with the Respondent.
3. Custody of the 2nd, 3rd and 4th children of the marriage: Rejoice Williams (16 years old), Josiah Williams (12 years old) and Gracious Williams (4 years old).
4. Costs of this action.

The Respondent’s counsel, J.B. Audu, Esq., did not contest the dissolution of the marriage but denied liability for the other claims.

In proof of her claims, Tabitha Bawa, herself, Hamisu Hamani, Yem Dabo and Charles Solomon gave evidence as Pw1 – Pw5 respectively. She tendered 10 receipts of the building materials she bought. They were admitted in evidence as Exhibits P1-P10. In his defence, the Respondent testified as Rw1 and invited Sunday Bako as Rw2. The parties’ Counsel addressed the Court after the house in issue and the Petitioner’s shop were visited.

In his final address, the Respondent’s Counsel, N.R. Yem, Esq. framed a lone question for determination as follows: Whether the Petitioner is entitled to her claim of compensation or damages under customary marriage but particularly under Jaba custom. He answered it in the negative. He submitted that under Jaba custom, children inherit their parents, hence the matrimonial home, which is jointly built by the parties, is the inheritance of their children to the exclusion of any other person. He further submitted that the Petitioner had nothing when she was married and the money she claimed to have invested in the building project was obtained from the family business which she was running. He referred the Court to Adim v NBC Ltd (2000) 9 NWLR (Pt. 1200) 543 at 549.

On the custody of the parties’ children, Counsel submitted that the Respondent has paid the Petitioner’s bride price, hence he should automatically get the custody of the parties’ children as they are already with him and he is already taking care of them. He referred the Court to Akande Karimu & Ors v Joseph Oyewole (2003) 6 WRN 36-192 and urged the Court to dismiss the Petitioner’s claim with punitive costs in favour of the Respondent.

In his brief address, the Petitioner’s counsel adopted the Respondent counsel’s lone issue for determination. He answered it in the positive. He submitted that the Respondent did not contest the dissolution of the marriage and added that the Petitioner has proved her claims for custody and damages. He urged the Court to grant their reliefs.

Considering the totality of the parties’ evidence, we distilled the following questions for resolution:

1. Does a valid marriage in accordance with Jaba custom exist between the parties?
2. Has the Petitioner placed credible evidence before the Court to establish her claim for the sum of N5million as compensation for her contribution in the building of their matrimonial home?
3. Will the best interest of the parties’ children be guaranteed with the Petitioner who asked for it?

By virtue of Section 24 of the Customary Courts Law 2001, Customary Courts in Kaduna State are to apply customary laws, the principles of natural justice, equity and good conscience in the determination of civil disputes. The Courts are also empowered to use common sense and simplicity devoid of technicalities to do substantial justice. See Section 59 of the Customary Courts Law 2001 and Agbasi v. Obi (1998) 2 NWLR (Pt. 536) 1 at 14, paras. A-B. It is also permissible for Customary Courts to consider the totality of the evidence of the parties, irrespective of their claims, to deduce and justly resolve the actual issues in dispute. See Ibrahim v. Abashe & Ors (2014) KCCLR-24 (CCA). It is noteworthy that the appearance of legal practitioners in the Customary Courts does not affect the principles of adjudication in the Court. See the admonition of Idigbe, JSC in Chief Karimu Ajagunjeun v Sobo Osho of Yeku Village & Ors (1977) LLJR-SC. These authorities will be operational in the mind of the Court as we resolved the questions raised.

Question 1

Does a valid marriage in accordance with jaba custom exist between the parties?

Pw1’s testimony that the parties are married is materially corroborated by the evidence of Pw2, Pw3 and Pw5. It is also materially supported by the evidence of Rw1 and Rw2. Even though the Petitioner was impregnated outside wedlock by the Respondent according to Pw1, Rw2 averred that they subsequently paid her bride price. Under Jaba custom, as can be deduced from the parties’ evidence, the payment of bride price is an essential requirement in the process of creating a valid marriage. In the instant case, it is not in doubt that the Respondent has performed the customary rite for his union with the Petitioner after impregnating her outside wedlock.

Considering the evidence of the parties alongside the Jaba marriage custom, we resolve Question 1 in the affirmative. We find that a valid marriage in accordance with Jaba custom exists between the parties. We so hold. Consequently, this marriage is hereby dissolved with effect from today, 22^nd September, 2025.

Question 2

Has the Petitioner placed credible evidence before the Court to establish her claim for the sum of N5million as compensation for her contribution in the building of their matrimonial home?

Pw1 testified that the parties jointly built their matrimonial home and the Petitioner’s contribution in the project was even higher. Under cross-examination, the witness said she does not know how much the Petitioner has put in the building but insisted that the house belongs to both of them.

The testimony of Pw2 materially corroborates that of Pw1 that she and the Respondent jointly built their matrimonial home. The witness filled in the details of her contributions to the project to perfection before they packed in. She narrated her financial contributions which are partly evidenced by Exhibits P1 – P10. Her evidence also shows her passion and commitment to seeing to the completion of the building. She narrated how she personally supervised the building project and how she traveled twice or thrice weekly to Kaduna and returned sometimes at night in order to restock her shop, the profit of which enabled them to begin and sustain the building project. In fact, the testimony of Rw2, the Respondent’s father, materially supports this piece of evidence when he said: “It was from the business that they were able to live well and peacefully.” That statement aligns with Pw2’s evidence under cross-examination that she can make N1million profit weekly and only two them were into the business when she started. It is apparent from Pw2’s evidence that she did not only invest her money in the building project but also her time. This is an invaluable resource when viewed alongside the Respondent’s admission in his evidence as Rw1 that “by the nature of my work, I am not usually at home.”

As Rw1, the Respondent asserted that he was the one who opened the shop for the Petitioner. His evidence that they jointly built the house was qualified with the assertion that he gave the Petitioner the money for the building materials and labour. However, he did not state in what form or manner he gave her the money, whether cash or by transfer. No bank statement was tendered to evidence any transfer of any money to the Petitioner to materially contradict her testimony that it was the profit from her business that she used in the building project.

Rw2 stated that the Petitioner did not come with anything when she was married. He asserted that it was the Respondent that opened the business for her. Under cross-examination, he stated that it was the sum of N50,000 that the Respondent gave her to start the business. This piece of evidence was not corroborated as Rw1 who allegedly gave the money did not mention any such amount. Moreover, Pw2 had testified that long before the plastic business, she sold shoes and bags after her WAEC. That fact demonstrates her business acumen and a plus to her assertion that she is running a successful plastic business.

Pw3 – Pw5 are some of the workers engaged by the Petitioner who testified about who contracted them, the work they did and how much they were paid. They all admitted under cross examination that they would not know whether it was the Respondent that gave the Petitioner the money for the building materials and labour.

From the evidence of the parties, certain facts indisputable:

1. The parties jointly built their matrimonial home, that is, the 3-bedroom flat in issue.
2. The Petitioner is a successful businesswoman who invested the profits from her business in the building project.
3. The Petitioner also devoted her time to buying some of the building materials, paying the workers and supervising the work.
4. The Respondent was also personally involved in the work such as supplying sand and bringing block makers.
5. The Petitioner was actively involved in the building project while running her business and taking care of their children as the Respondent is not usually at home.

We pause here to ask: Are these facts sufficient to establish the Petitioner’s claim for N5million as compensation for her contribution to the building of their matrimonial home? Should her contribution to the building project be limited to provable financial contributions only? Should her care for the parties’ children and other matrimonial duties be considered in determining the quantum of her share in their matrimonial home? Is the fact that she began the plastic business, which indisputably became successful, be watered down because she started it after marrying the Respondent? These questions are all subsets of Question 1. In resolving them, we shall draw inspiration from Jaba custom, equity, common sense, natural Justice and good conscience which we earlier stated as being operational in the mind of the Court in resolving the disputes between the parties.

There is no credible evidence to the contrary that the Petitioner cannot claim her share of their matrimonial home. In fact, it is the quantum of her contribution that was contested by the Respondent who admitted that they jointly built the property. Apparently, the Petitioner is aware of the limits of her right to their matrimonial properties when she stated that the land upon which they built their matrimonial home was a gift from the Respondent’s grandmother. She also did not include the 3-rooms they built on the land and the new three rooms which have reached lintel level. Her exclusion of these buildings is a concession on her part to the more significant roles played by the Respondent in their construction. Without further ado, we hold that the Petitioner has a right under Jaba custom, as a divorcee, especially one who has been and is still taking care of the parties’ children, to share in their matrimonial home otherwise, the custom would have been declared repugnant to natural justice, equity and good conscience. Such a custom would have been unenforceable being unconstitutional as it will discriminate against the right of a woman to share in a matrimonial property she has, indisputably, invested in multi-dimensionally. We so hold.

We also ask: Is it equitable for the Petitioner to take a share of their matrimonial home? We draw inspiration for our answer to this question from the recent decision of the Supreme Court of Kenya in JOO v MBO & Federation of Women Lawyers (FIDA Kenya) & Anor [2023] KESC 4 (KLR). Even though the parties in the case were married under the Act, the Court based its decision on the settlement of properties not just on statutory laws but also on the principles of equity. The Court held that:

To our minds, equity is an important principle when it comes to matrimonial property since what is fair as it relates to equity is not a question of the quantitative contribution by each party but rather the contribution by any party in any form, whether direct or indirect. Any substantial contribution by a party to a marriage that led to acquisition of matrimonial property, even though such contribution is indirect, but nevertheless has in one way or another, enabled the acquisition of such property amounts to significant contribution. Such direct or indirect acts as was discussed by Lord Justice Fox in Burns v Burns [1984] 1 All ER 244 may include:

i. Paying part of the purchase price of the matrimonial property.

ii. Contributing regularly to the monthly payments in the acquisition of such property.

iii. Making a substantial financial contribution to the family expenses so as to enable the mortgage instalments to be paid.

iv. Contributing to the running of and welfare of the home and easing the burden of the spouse paying for the property.

v. Caring for children and the family at large as the other spouse works to earn money to pay for the property.

The principle in this persuasive decision applies to the facts in the instant case, particularly to the multi-dimensional contributions made by the Petitioner in the building of their matrimonial home.

In the more recent decision of the Court of Appeal in Aguolu v Aguolu (2025) LPELR-80269 (CA), the Court reiterated the positions of the law on the settlement of properties which echoes the conclusion reached by the Kenyan Supreme Court. The Court held that a mere marriage, without more, does not entitle a spouse to an equal share of a matrimonial property. The marriage in issue in Aguolu’s case is also a statutory marriage. The Court noted that the settlement of properties in matrimonial causes is subject to the discretion of the Court which is to be exercised based on the evidence of the parties, not in isolation. It is noteworthy that Section 72 of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1970 which was referenced by the Court requires that in the settlement of properties, the Court should consider what is “just and equitable in the circumstance of the case.” The Court also referenced Fribance v Fribance (1957) 1 All ER 357 at 360 CA where Denning L.J. (as he then was) held that:

In the present case, it so happened that the wife went out to work and used her earnings to help run the household and buy the children’s clothes whilst the husband saved. It might very well have been the other way around. The title of the family asset does not depend on the mere chance of which way around it was. It does not depend on how they happen to allocate their expenditure. The whole of the resources were expended on their joined benefit … and the product should belong to them jointly. It belongs to them in equal shares.

In the instant case, the Petitioner has demonstrated beyond persuasion that she has committed not just her resources but also her time in the building of their matrimonial home.

Considering the evidence of the parties alongside the applicable laws, we answer Question 2 in their affirmative. We find that the Petitioner has presented a credible and cogent evidence to establish her claim for N5million as compensation for her contributions to the building of their matrimonial home. We so hold.

But should we award this sum without knowing the actual value of the property? Our answer is in the negative as doing so might occasion injustice to the Respondent. Therefore, we reason that it will be fairer to both parties if we make an alternative but equitable order in the circumstance. Consequently, the Court hereby orders that the parties’ matrimonial home, particularly the 3-bedroom flat, be valued and sold and the proceeds shared between them in the ratio of 40:60, as the justice of this case demands. The property shall be valued by a qualified and independent private estate valuer. The Registrar of this Court shall supervise the execution of this judgment.

Question 3

Will the best interest of the parties’ children be better guaranteed with the Petitioner who claims it?

Pw1 testified that the parties lived together with their children and were firsthand witnesses of the numerous acts of violence their father inflicted on their mother. The witness narrated four incidents of such violence against the Petitioner one of which led to the breaking of her hand. She also narrated how the parties’ children were the ones sent by the Petitioner to inform her of some of the beatings. The witness further averred that the parties’ children are presently living with their mother at her (witness’) house where the Petitioner has been solely responsible for their upkeep for the past two years since they all left the parties’ matrimonial home. These pieces of evidence were not challenged by the Respondent.

The evidence of Pw2 is materially corroborative of the testimony of Pw1. The witness stated that the Respondent stopped providing for their children even before they followed her when she left their matrimonial home. She also narrated how she struggled to source for the fees for their older children who got admission into tertiary institutions to the extent of reporting the Respondent to Human Rights and Civil Defence. Human Rights is an expression used by some litigants to refer to the Sexual Assault Referral Centre – SARC (Salama Centre), Kafanchan where cases of gender-based violence are being reported. The witness also stated the limited role her father in-law (Rw2) played in the education of their children. Pw2 also testified that the Respondent has given out their children’s room to tenants while he occupies the remaining room with his new wife. These pieces of evidence were not impeached under cross examination. Rather, the aim of the Respondent during the cross examination was to try to blackmail the Petitioner into agreeing that their matrimonial home is their children’s inheritance and should not be sold.

In his evidence, Rw1’s attempt to contradict the testimonies of Pw1 and Pw2 on his lack of care for their children was not persuasive. The witness made general assertions without any concrete material or credible corroboratory evidence to buttress it. Rw2’s attempt to corroborate Rw1’s testimony is also not persuasive as he also made general assertions about the Respondent’s care for their children. However, the witness’ testimony materially supports the evidence of Pw1 and Pw2 that the parties’ children are presently with the Petitioner.

From the evidence of the parties’ witnesses, it is apparent that their children have been with the Petitioner since she left her matrimonial home. It is also established that the Respondent does not care for their children, at least prior to their departure with their mother from their house to her parents’ house two years ago. In fact, the unchallenged evidence of Pw2 that the Respondent has rented their children’s room showed the extent of the Respondent’s lack of care and concern for their children’s future as he has no intention to keep them. Interestingly, these are the same children he is naming as the heirs of the parties’ matrimonial home, a ploy obviously aimed at blackmailing the Petitioner into agreeing that the house should not be sold.

The law is settled that the payment of fees is not the only thing that the welfare of a child entails. Among other equal components of a child’s welfare is the provision of a safe and healthy environment to enable the child to be nurtured into a responsible adult. In view of the Respondent’s numerous maltreatment and beatings of the parties’ mother in the presence of their children, is there any justification to allow him near them? What kind of adults will they grow up to be if they are continually exposed to such unwholesome behaviours? Wouldn’t their sons grow up believing that wives are to be treated with indignity? Wouldn’t they grow up believing that wives deserve to be beaten at will and abandoned without any consequences? Wouldn’t their daughters grow up with the perverted mindset that women deserve to be beaten rather than treated with dignity? Given what the parties’ children have experienced in their developing and pre-adult years, we are of the view that it is necessary that they are kept in the custody a person who will give them a healthy environment to grow and hopefully imbibe a positive view of the family and marriage relationship.

In Odogwu v Odogwu (1992) 3 NWLR (Pt 215) 2, the Court held that:

The welfare of child is not the material provision in the house – good clothes, food, air conditioners, television, all gadgets normally associated with the middle class, – it is more of the happiness of the child and his psychological development.

This principle aptly aligns with the circumstance of this case.

Ordinarily, the wishes of the parties’ children would have been sought but for the fact that the Court does not wish to disturb their recovery period after their unpleasant experiences while living with both parents. The Court also notes the Respondent’ lack of concern and care for the parties’ children, especially after they followed their mother. He placed no credible and persuasive evidence before the Court to show that he has been providing for their children since they left the house. We see the Respondent’s act of demarcating their children’s rooms from the rest of the flat and letting it out as the absence of an intention to have them back and keep them. It is no wonder that he did not even counterclaim their custody.

Considering the evidence of the parties alongside the applicable laws, we answer Question 3 in the affirmative. We find that the Petitioner has placed credible and persuasive evidence before the Court to establish her claim to the custody of their children. We so hold. Therefore, the custody of the parties’ children is hereby granted to the Petitioner. In order to give the Respondent the opportunity to make things right with his children, he is hereby granted visitation rights to see them, an act he should do with utmost respect for his ex-wife and former in-laws. In addition, the Court hereby orders the Respondent to send the sum of N100,000 monthly to the Petitioner for the upkeep of their four children. These orders are not absolute as they can be varied pursuant to an application by either party or the Court in accordance with Section 27(2) of the Customary Courts Law 2001.

Before concluding this judgment, we wish to state that the inhumane treatment the Respondent subjected the Petitioner to while they were living together is condemnable and a criminal act. No spouse has the right to be violent towards the other as there are civilized, dignified, responsible and matured ways of handling matrimonial disputes without resorting to violence. The fact that the Respondent had beaten and injured the Petitioner numerously was unchallenged. So also is the evidence that he abandoned her, and by extension their children, for one week without care or concern after one of such beatings. There was also no disputation by the Respondent of the averment that he has not made any provision for the upkeep of his wife and children after they followed their mother to his in-law’s house. It is also not disputed that it was after the Petitioner began mounting pressure on the Respondent to provide for their children that he decided to tell her he no longer desires her as a wife, an act which led her to institute this case so that their rights and obligations can be judicially determined. In Pius Abur v. Alphosus Igbudu & Anor (2007) KCCLR-180 (CCA), the Customary Court of Appeal, Kaduna held that general damages need not be claimed or proved but may be granted by the Court if the circumstance of a case warrants it.

Considering the foregoing, we reason that the circumstance of this case, particularly the physical abuse, abandonment, emotional and psychological traumas inflicted on the Petitioner by the Respondent, warrants the award of general damages to her. Therefore, damages in the sum of N2million is hereby awarded in favour of the Petitioner against the Respondent.

We also wish to make two observations on parental responsibilities to their children. Firstly, providing necessary support and guidance to a child who has been given out in marriage, especially when the marriage becomes toxic and life-threatening, is not an undue interference. The Court notes with satisfaction that at the end of her testimony, the Petitioner’s mother (Pw1) came to the noble and humane realization that were her daughter to be killed in her marriage, the Respondent will remarry while she loses her child. As a matter of fact, after the departure of her daughter from her matrimonial home and even without divorcing her, the Respondent has remarried. It is hoped that parents will take care of their children and provide a safe haven for them at home especially when they are faced with domestic violence in their matrimonial homes.

We would also want to state that the failure of the Respondent’s parents to take steps to act pursuant to the Petitioner’s distress call is despicable. The Petitioner narrated how she reached out to her in-laws when faced with their son’s brutality but was ignored as they never intervened to caution their son and admonish him to treat his wife with dignity and love. Parents in-law should know that their son’s wife is not called a “daughter in-law” as a mere formality but as an attestation to the fact that she has left her parents and is now directly under new parents who are expected to treat her not just as their son’s wife but also as a daughter. Would the Respondent’s parents be happy if the inhumane treatments meted on the Petitioner were done to their biological daughter? We do not think so. We also find the Respondent’s witnesses’ description of the Petitioner as having nothing when she was married as being disrespectful and distasteful. Do they know what she would have become in the society or what she would have had were her education not truncated after the Respondent impregnated her outside wedlock, especially seeing the business acumen she demonstrated?

Secondly, we also observed from the evidence of Pw1, the Petitioner’s mother, that their non-interference in the plight of their daughter in her matrimonial home, despite the obvious and numerous acts of life threatening violence by the Respondent, appears to be borne out of a religious conviction. It is of note that even though God is said to hate divorce (Malachi 2:16), there is nowhere in the Holy Book that domestic violence is justified. Rather, the Bible requires husbands to love their wives just as Christ loves the church, an act that will naturally make their wives to submit without reservation. (Ephesians 5: 21-29)

A deep seated conviction and belief in the God and the Bible is not a justification for turning a blind eye and burying one’s head in the sand like the proverbial ostrich. Marriage is an institution into which parents give their children out with the belief that they will build their homes with love and respect. It is also a union between two people who decided to take their affection for each other to a higher level. Would the parents of a woman allow and encourage their daughter to marry a man who will treat her with indignity and beat her as if she were a child? We do not think so. Even the Bible-inspired phrase drawn from Proverbs 13:14 says, “Spare the rod, spoil the child”, not “Spare the rod, spoil the wife.”

If a suitor should tell a lady’s parents that after marrying their daughter he will no longer respect them and will subject their daughter to indignity and violence will they agree to give him their daughter? We do not think so. What kind of man will maltreat a woman even in the presence of her children? What manner of man will subject a woman to violence: a woman that has given birth to five children; a woman whose body handled ravaging and conflicting hormones five times during the nine months of pregnancies, each with its peculiarities; a woman who struggled to recover after each nursing and nurturing period for each of their five children; a woman who survived and recovered from a violence-induced miscarriage and most likely suffered from Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) and or depression after one or all her childbirths and all these within 20 years of marriage, the same period she still managed a business successfully to contribute to making their home financially stable? It is hoped that the Respondent will amend his ways and treat the women he takes as wives with dignity, love and respect. A spouse whose marriage has become toxic and life-threatening should know that it is okay to seek help and guidance because remaining in such a union, which may lead to their death, is not a virtue. They should always remember that being alive is more important than being in a toxic and life-threatening relationship where death is just a matter of time. Marriage is not a licence to treat another adult as one treats a child or a slave. The token paid by a man as bride price is not a purchase price which grants him ownership of the woman to deal with as he pleases and discard her as he wishes without consequences.

The costs of this action in the sum of N300,000 is hereby about awarded in favour of the Petitioner against the Respondent. The total judgment sum, N2.3million, shall be paid within 30 days from today. Interest at the rate of 10% shall accrue annually on the judgment sum until it is finally and fully paid.

Any party that is dissatisfied with this decision may appeal to the Customary Court of Appeal, Kaduna within 30 days from today, 22^nd September 2025.

Signed 22.09.2025

I commend your perseverance and dedication to achieving this milestone.

As you embark on your legal journey, I wish you continued growth, success, and an unwavering commitment to justice and professionalism.

My very best wishes,

Audrey Chinelo Ofoegbunam, Esq, ACIArb(UK), ANICArb, ACIS, AICMC, ACTI.

Damilola Balogun, an undergraduate of the University of Lagos (UNILAG), has died from drowning following a backflip stunt at Eleko Beach in Lagos.

The tragic incident was said to have occurred on Friday, September 19, 2025, at the beach, after Damilola and his friends were said to have gone to Eleko Beach to have fun.

There were conflicting reports on the actual date of the accident, as one account said it was Friday, September 19, and another account by the school management said it was Thursday, September 18.

An account stated that Damilola, who is a student in the Faculty of Education, asked a friend to record him while attempting the stunt. Moments later, a strong wave swept him away before help could reach him. Despite desperate rescue efforts, he could not be saved.

A medical doctor and social media user, Dr. Farouk, who first shared the news online, noted that Damilola’s body was recovered on Saturday morning at Museyo Beach, Ibeju-Lekki, about two kilometres from the spot of the incident.

The news has thrown the UNILAG community into mourning, with friends and fellow students flooding social media with tributes.

One colleague, Doyin Doski, described him as full of life, noting that he had only recently been elected President of his faculty after serving as Vice President.

A statement by the Director of Communications, UNILAG, Mrs Adejoke Alaga-Ibraheem, confirmed the sad news and stated that the Vice Chancellor, Prof Folushade Ogunsola, has commiserated with the family.

“It is true, Mr Damilola Balogun, the Faculty of Education student, drowned off Eleko Beach on Thursday, September 18, 2025.

“The Vice-Chancellor, Professor Folasade T. Ogunsola, OON, FAS, on behalf of the entire University community, commiserates with his family, and prays that God grants the bereaved family the strength and fortitude to bear the irreplaceable loss,” she stated.

The West African States of Mali, Burkina Faso, and Niger have announced their withdrawal from the International Criminal Court (ICC), stating that they no longer recognise its jurisdiction.

The three military-led countries accused the court of arbitrarily prosecuting war crimes and serving as an “instrument of neo-colonialist repression.”

They emphasised their commitment to upholding human rights protection in line with their values.

The same argument had earlier been used by the three countries to justify their withdrawal from the Economic Community of West African States, ECOWAS.

Human rights groups and UN experts have accused Mali’s and Burkina Faso’s armed forces and allied militias of committing war crimes in operations against Islamist militias – alongside atrocities carried out by the militant groups themselves.

National authorities say investigations are underway, but none have so far led to public conclusions.

The ICC, based in The Hague, has been prosecuting the most serious crimes such as genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity since 2002.
All EU countries are members.

However, the U.S., Israel and Russia are not signatories.

In spite of abundant resources such as gold and uranium – largely extracted by European and North American companies, Mali, Burkina Faso, and Niger remain among the world’s least developed countries.

Located in the Sahel region on the southern edge of the Sahara, they sit along key smuggling and migration routes towards Europe.

Between 2020 and 2023, military leaders seized power in all three former French colonies after elected governments, backed by Western states, failed to quell Islamist insurgencies.

The junta have turned increasingly away from Western partners and towards Russia for military cooperation.

According to dpa/NAN, the ICC, based in The Hague, has been prosecuting the most serious crimes such as genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity since 2002.
All EU countries are members.

NAN

The lawmaker representing Kogi Central, Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan, on Monday, launched a strong legal offensive against the Federal Government, describing the criminal defamation charges filed against her as a brazen act of political persecution and an exhibition of double standard by the Federal Government.

In a preliminary objection seeking the dismissal of the six counts filed against her by the Attorney General of the Federation, the Kogi senator contended that while the Federal Government was quick to file charges against her based on the complaint of the Senate President, Godswill Akpabio, the same government ignored her own earlier petitions against Akpabio.

The charges, filed under the Cybercrimes (Prohibition, Prevention, etc.) (Amendment) Act, 2024, were brought following petitions by Akpabio and ex-Kogi State governor, Yahaya Bello, over remarks she allegedly made during a public address and a television interview.

Her arraignment on June 20 drew national attention, with many opposition figures alleging that the case was politically motivated.

No Power, No Road, No Equipped Clinic: The Triple Troubles of Sawonjo, Ogun state0:00 / 1:01

Àwọn Ará Ìlú Fi Èrò Wọn Hàn Nípa ₦330,000,000,000 Tí Ìjọba Àpapọ̀ Pín Láàrín Àwọn Aláìní Nàìjíríà0:00 / 0:00

She was granted bail on self-recognition after pleading not guilty.

The case, marked FHC/ABJ/CR/195/2025, is being prosecuted by the Director of Public Prosecution of the Federation, Mohammed Abubakar.

In her defence on Monday, Akpoti-Uduaghan filed preliminary objections before both the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory and the Federal High Court, challenging the jurisdiction of the courts and insisting that the Attorney-General of the Federation has no locus standi to prosecute what she described as a private defamation case.

Her legal team, led by four Senior Advocates of Nigeria—Prof. Roland Otaru (SAN); Dr. E. West-Idahosa (SAN); J.J. Usman (SAN); and M.J. Numa (SAN)—argued that the charges were “unconstitutional, frivolous, and designed to intimidate opposition voices.”

The defence further submitted exhibits showing that her comments fell within the ambit of public discourse and media commentary, noting that prosecuting her statements as crimes was inconsistent with democratic norms.

Her lawyers maintained that: “Defamation matters are inherently civil in nature and that attempting to criminalise them constitutes intimidation, suppresses free speech, and represents a misuse of the criminal justice system.”

Akpoti-Uduaghan also accused the authorities of selective justice, alleging that while her petitions over threats to her life by the complainants were ignored, the same institutions hastily filed charges against her.

She contends that the disparity represents a violation of her constitutional rights, “particularly Section 42, and represents discriminatory prosecution because of my opposition political affiliation.”

The charges centre on her claim that Akpabio allegedly instructed Bello to have her killed in Kogi State—a statement she reportedly made at a public gathering in Ihima on April 4, 2025, and later repeated during a television interview.

Prosecutors say the remarks were false, malicious, and capable of inciting violence, endangering lives, and breaching public order.

Related News
UPDATED: National Assembly unseals Natasha’s office
JUST IN: Senate postpones plenary resumption to October 7
Military base will curb Kwara banditry – Council chair
Her defence team has urged the courts to dismiss the charges at the preliminary stage, warning that allowing the matter to proceed would not only waste taxpayers’ resources but also undermine the credibility of the justice system.

Her strong pushback comes just hours after the Federal High Court in Abuja adjourned the matter to October 20, following an objection raised by her counsel, Ehiogie West-Idahosa (SAN).

Meanwhile, a coalition of women’s rights organisations has taken the standoff between Akpoti-Uduaghan and the Senate to the United Nations, accusing Senate leadership of gender-based discrimination.

In a formal complaint submitted on Monday to UN Special Rapporteur on Violence Against Women and Girls, Reem Alsalem, the Womanifesto Network—representing more than 350 organisations—argued that the Senate’s actions breach Nigeria’s obligations under the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women which the country ratified in 1985.

“This is about the integrity of our democracy. If a senator can be silenced for reporting harassment, what hope do ordinary women have?” asked the group’s convener, Dr. Abiola Akiyode-Afolabi.

The complaint urges the UN to pressure Nigeria’s government and the Senate to comply with a Federal High Court ruling by reinstating Akpoti-Uduaghan immediately, and to establish an impartial investigation into her harassment claim.

Signatories to the petition include Amnesty International Nigeria, FIDA Nigeria, Baobab for Women’s Human Rights, Women in Management, Business and Public Service (WIMBIZ), and Stand to End Rape.

The activists warned that the Senate’s refusal to comply with the court order sends a dangerous signal to women in politics.

“This case shows that sexual harassment in politics isn’t just a personal violation—it’s a threat to women’s participation in governance,” the petition states.

As of press time, the UN Special Rapporteur’s office had not yet responded.

Akpoti-Uduaghan went public on February 20 with allegations that Senate President Godswill Akpabio harassed her—claims Akpabio has strongly denied. Days later, the Senate’s Ethics and Privileges Committee recommended a six-month suspension, citing breaches of parliamentary procedure.

The suspension stripped her of salary, security, and access to the chamber, drawing outrage from civil society groups who said the punishment was retaliatory and disproportionate.

On July 4, the Federal High Court in Abuja ruled the suspension unconstitutional and ordered her reinstatement. But the Senate has blocked her return, arguing that the judgment contained no binding reinstatement order and remains “under litigation.”

There are strong indications that the imbroglio between the embattled Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan,  PDP, Kogi Central and the President of the Senate,  Senator Godswill Akpabio, is coming to an end as the Sergeant at Arms of the National Assembly, along with combined personnel of security organisations, have unsealed her 205 office of the Senate wing.

With this development, the National Assembly has now granted the suspended Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan access to her office and the National Assembly premises.

With her office now unsealed, Akpoti-Uduaghan can access the National Assembly premises, potentially paving the way for her to resume her legislative duties.

Read Also: Blocking Senator Natasha’s resumption is a constitutional breach— NBA to Senate

It was gathered that the move to open her office before resumption is to enable Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan to be in the hallowed chamber upon resumption on 7th October, 2025.

According to a source, the decision was arrived at during yesterday’s leadership meeting of the Senate, where a motion will be moved and barring any changes,  the Minority Leader of the Senate,  Senator Abba Moro, PDP, Benue South, will move the motion for her to apologise,  then seconded, and it will be taken.

Recall that the embattled then Chairman of the Senate Committee on Diaspora and NGOs,  Akpoti-Uduaghan, was in  March slammed with a six-month suspension by the Senate, which also barred her from participating in all activities of the 10th Senate over her alleged misconduct when she protested against the reassignment of her seat by Akpabio on February 20, 2025.

Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan’s suspension ended in September 2025, but she has been unable to resume her duties due to ongoing legal issues and continued opposition from the Senate leadership. Perhaps because of the extended recess, we will see how it plays out as the Senate resumes plenary sessions.

Following her suspension, she took  her case to the courts  to vacate the suspension, as she was not successful, and the Senate, on its part, spoke through its relevant officers, insisting that the matter had nothing to do with sexual allegations,  but everything to do with Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan’s contravention of the Senate Standing Orders as amended.

Binta Nyako, Judge of the Federal High Court, Abuja, in July, described the six-month suspension as excessive and unconstitutional, and thereafter ordered the Senate to recall the embattled Senator, citing that suspending a Senator for such a long period would expose constituents to non-representation during that time.

Thereafter, she attempted to return to the Senate but was denied access, and the Senate stood its ground, insisting that she serve her full term.

Also, recall that the Clerk to the National Assembly,  CNA, Kamorudeen Ogunlana, wrote her  through the Acting Clerk to NASS, Yahaya Danzaria, who notified her that  her six-month suspension subsists until the Court of Appeal delivers judgment in the suit she instituted against the Senate.

On September 11, Counsel to Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan, Michael Jonathan Numa, SAN, wrote to the Clerk to the National Assembly, CNA, Kamorudeen Ogunlana, to recall the Senator so that she could resume her legislative duties.

According to Numa in the letter, the CNA should note that failure to comply by Monday, 15th September 2025, will leave them  with no alternative but to initiate proceedings against you personally and in your official capacity. Such proceedings will include, but are not limited to, committal for contempt, disciplinary action for breach of the Code of Conduct for Public Officers, liability for instigating a breach of the peace with potential implications for national security, and any other remedies available to our client under the law.

Responding to the letter from her lawyer, the CNA, Ogunlana, urged the public to remain patient and allow the appropriate institutions, including the Senate and the courts, to discharge their constitutional responsibilities in respect of the resumption of Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan.

According to him, he does not possess the authority to review, reverse or interpret Senate decisions against the backdrop that his office serves strictly as an administrative arm, providing support to the Senate in accordance with their resolutions, Standing Orders and the provisions of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended).

In a statement signed by the Director, Information for the Clerk to the National Assembly, Bullah Audu Bi-Allah, he said that Ogunlana is therefore not in a position to facilitate her resumption at this time, just as he noted that It must be emphasized that the determination of whether Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan can resume her legislative duties as of right without any further or fresh resolution of the Senate following the expiration of her six months suspension lies solely with the Senate and not with the office of the CNA.

During the National Public Hearing for the Special Seats Reserved for Women Bill, which took place at the National Assembly, Abuja, on Monday, Senior Advocate of Nigeria and Life Bencher, Professor Joy Ezeilo, joined other voices to stress that ” Where the power is, Nigerian women are not!”

In the paper she presented at the public hearing, Prof. Ezeilo raised concerns that the representation of women in Nigeria’s national and state parliaments remains alarmingly low, with women securing less than 5 percent of available seats.

“Comparative Analysis of Nigeria and Other African States:

“Significant progress has been made in several African countries regarding the representation of women in parliament. According to the Inter-Parliamentary Union’s 2023 database, the following countries have achieved at least the 30% benchmark set by the Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action (BDPA: 1995) for women in power and decision-making:

1.  Rwanda: Women constitute 61.3% of the lower house and 34.6% of the upper legislative chamber.

2.  South Africa: Women represent 46.2% of the lower house and 44.4% of the upper legislative house.

3.  Senegal: The percentage of women in parliament is 46%.

4. Namibia: Women hold 44.2% of seats in the lower house and 14.3% in the upper legislative chamber.
5. Mozambique: Women’s representation in parliament stands at 43.2%.
6. Cape Verde: Women make up 41.7% of parliament.

Other notable countries include:
–          Burundi: Women hold 38.2% of the lower house and 41.0% of the upper legislative house.
–          Cameroon: The representation is 34.5% in the lower house and 29.0% in the upper chamber.
–          Uganda: Women represent 33.8% of parliament.
–          Angola: Women hold 33.6% of parliamentary seats.
–          South Sudan: Women represent 32.4% in the lower house and 32.1% in the upper legislative chamber.
–          Zimbabwe: Women make up 30.6% of parliament, with 44.2% in the lower and upper legislative houses.
–          Tanzania: Women hold 37.4% of parliamentary seats.

“Faced with these sobering realities, Nigerian women across the country unite in strong support for the bold legislative action of the 10th National Assembly. The ongoing Constitution Review Process, particularly the proposed Special Seats Bill to amend the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (CFRN), signals a transformative step forward.

“The statistics show that Nigeria still has a long way to go in achieving gender parity in its parliament. Today, I participated in the public hearing of the National Assembly Constitution Review (House of Representatives) in Abuja.

“I stand in solidarity with the women and men of goodwill in Nigeria to declare that now is the time for the Special Seats Bill.”

Read the full text of her below.

NATIONAL PUBLIC HEARING 10^TH NATIONAL ASSEMBLY (NASS) CONSTITUTION REVIEW PROCESS SPECIAL SEATS BILL: THE TIME IS NOW! SUPPORT THIS ACTION FOR INCLUSIVE GOVERNANCE 22^ND SEPTEMBER, 2025 VENUE: TRANSCORP HILTON, ABUJA, FCT

PREAMBLE/SALUTATIONS: Your Excellency, the Chairman of the House of Reps, Constitution Review, distinguished leadership of HoRs, Honourable Members of the Constitution Review Process, Ladies and Gentlemen, including of the media and civil society organizations, especially women’s groups.

Introduction- Where are we in Inclusive Governance?

Despite the historic 2023 general election, the representation of women in Nigeria’s national and state parliaments remains alarmingly low, with women securing less than 5 percent of available seats. This stark statistic not only falls far short of the global average of 26.5 percent, but it highlights an alarming trend of declining female participation in Nigeria’s legislative bodies. Shockingly, at least 14 state houses of assembly have no female representatives at all. In the federal legislature, women hold a mere 3 percent of seats in the Senate and just 4 percent in the House of Representatives. The situation is equally bleak at the state level, where only 48 women serve among 990 legislators. Out of 1,019 female candidates who contested the 2023 State House of Assembly elections, only 48 emerged victorious—a discouraging success rate of just 4.7 percent for women.

Faced with these sobering realities, Nigerian women across the nation unite in strong support for the bold legislative action of the 10th National Assembly. The ongoing Constitution Review Process, and particularly the proposed Special Seats Bill to amend the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (CFRN), signals a transformative step forward. By championing the inclusion of gender-responsive provisions and affirmative action measures, this initiative aims to break down entrenched barriers and open the doors to meaningful representation for women in elective offices. It is time to end the cycle of exclusion and empower Nigerian women to claim their rightful place in the country’s leadership, shaping a future that reflects the true diversity and dynamism of our nation.

Comparative Analysis of Nigeria and Other African States

Significant progress has been made in several African countries regarding the representation of women in parliament. According to the Inter-Parliamentary Union’s 2023 database, the following countries have achieved at least the 30% benchmark set by the Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action (BDPA) for women in power and decision-making:

1.  Rwanda: Women constitute 61.3% of the lower house and 34.6% of the upper legislative chamber.

2.  South Africa: Women represent 46.2% of the lower house and 44.4% of the upper legislative house.

3.  Senegal: The percentage of women in parliament is 46%.

4. Namibia: Women hold 44.2% of seats in the lower house and 14.3% in the upper legislative chamber.

5. Mozambique : Women’s representation in parliament stands at 43.2%.

6. Cape Verde : Women make up 41.7% of parliament.

Other notable countries include:

• Burundi: Women hold 38.2% of the lower house and 41.0% of the upper legislative house.
• Cameroon: The representation is 34.5% in the lower house and 29.0% in the upper chamber.
• Uganda: Women represent 33.8% of parliament.
• Angola: Women hold 33.6% of parliamentary seats.
• South Sudan: Women represent 32.4% in the lower house and 32.1% in the upper legislative chamber.
• Niger: Women constitute 30.7% of parliament.
• Zimbabwe: Women make up 30.6% of parliament, with 44.2% in the lower and upper legislative houses.
• Tanzania: Women hold 37.4% of parliamentary seats.

This analysis highlights the strides made by various African countries in increasing women’s participation in governance and underscores the need for Nigeria to enhance its representation as well..

The statistics show that Nigeria still has a significant distance to cover in achieving gender parity in its parliament. Therefore, I support and stand in solidarity with the women and men of goodwill in Nigeria to declare that the time is now for the special seats bill.

The time is now! Inclusive governance is not just a lofty ideal—it is the recognition of women’s fundamental rights to shape the destiny of their nation. This is a matter of social justice, a cornerstone of authentic democracy, and a prerequisite for true and sustainable development. Women’s participation in government is not a privilege to be granted at the discretion of those in power; it is a constitutional and moral right that both the legislative and executive branches are duty-bound to uphold and advance. No woman should be expected to submit to laws or policies crafted without her voice or representation. The exclusion of women diminishes the very fabric of our democracy. Now is the moment to break the cycle of marginalization, insist on equal representation, and demand a system where every voice truly counts. The future of Nigeria depends on it.

UNDERSTANDING THE SPECIAL SEATS BILL PROPOSITION

This Bill seeks to amend the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999, to provide for the reservation of seats for women in the National Assembly and State Houses of Assembly. It seeks to remedy the low representation of women in Legislative Houses by providing for special constituencies to be contested and filled by women as a temporary measure to promote women’s political representation. The provision is subject to review after three general election cycles of twelve years, for either retaining, increasing, or abolishing the temporary measure.

RELEVANT SECTIONS OF THE CONSTITUTION TO BE ALTERED ARE: 48, 49, 71, 77, 91, 117 OF THE 1999 CFRN.

This Bill is expected to create additional seats as follows:

1. Senate: The Senate of the National Assembly will have one additional seat per state, plus one for the FCT, totaling 37 seats. This amendment aims to alter Section 48, which concerns the composition of the Senate.
2. House of Representatives: One additional seat for a women-only constituency across the 36 states plus the FCT, for a total of 37 seats.  The amendment targets the alteration of Section 49, which pertains to the composition of the House of Representatives. 
3. State Houses of Assembly of each state: Will reserve one additional seat per senatorial district, resulting in a total of three additional seats for women in each state of the Federation, plus the Federal Capital Territory (FCT). Section 91 on the Composition of the House of Assembly is to be amended to accommodate the additional seats.
4. Amendments to Sections 77 and 117 will provide for a “special constituency”, which means a constituency reserved explicitly for women, from which only women shall be elected, in accordance with the provisions of Sections 48, 49, and 91 of the 1999 Nigerian Constitution.

SUMMARY/CONCLUSION

Measures aimed at addressing inequalities and promoting inclusive governance do not constitute discrimination as defined in Section 42 of the 1999 CFRN. Instead, they support the realisation of the constitutional aspirations and objectives of non-discrimination among Nigerian citizens. This aligns with the National Gender Policy, 2022, which advocates for achieving 50 percent gender parity in elected and appointed positions. Vote in favour of these constitutional reforms! An increase in women’s representation benefits Nigeria.

No woman should ever be subjected to laws or policies crafted without her voice or representation. The exclusion of women is a direct affront to the very fabric of our democracy. We stand at a crossroads where we can choose to break the cycle of marginalization, insist on equal representation, and demand a system where every voice is valued.

The Future of Nigeria Depends on Us

Now is the moment to act decisively. The future of Nigeria hinges on our commitment to inclusive governance and equitable representation. Let us not miss this opportunity to change the narrative and embrace a governance structure that reflects the richness of our diversity.

Together, we can chart a course toward a more equitable, just, and prosperous Nigeria for all.

The time is now!

PROFESSOR JOY NGOZI EZEILO, SAN, OON (LIFE BENCHER)

Proposed amendment/Suggested Texts for Section 42:

JUSTIFICATION: The need for these measures comes from concerns that affirmative action—such as creating special seats—might be seen as discriminatory or as a breach of Section 42 of the Nigerian Constitution. However, Gender Bills that introduce “specific measures” are not meant to discriminate but to break down existing barriers and promote true equality of opportunity. These targeted actions are crucial in addressing historical and systemic inequalities that have limited women’s involvement in governance. By implementing such measures, we are not only supporting the principle of non-discrimination enshrined in the Constitution but also actively working towards the constitutional aim of inclusive representation. Ultimately, these reforms aim to create a level playing field, making sure that all citizens, regardless of gender, have fair access to political participation and leadership roles.

EITHER THIS (A)

S.42 Nothing in this Section shall prevent Parliament from enacting laws that are reasonably necessary to provide:

(a) for the implementation of policies and programmes aimed at redressing social, economic or educational imbalance in the Nigerian society; and

(b) for matters relating to adoption, marriage, divorce, burial, devolution of property on death or other personal law issues.

Repeal of S. 42 (3)

OR

THIS (B)

New Section 42

1. Everyone is equal before the law and has the right to equal protection and benefit from the law.

Equality includes the full and equal enjoyment of all rights and freedoms. To promote the achievement of equality, legislative and other measures designed to protect or advance persons or categories of persons disadvantaged by unfair discrimination may be taken.

The State shall not discriminate directly or indirectly against anyone on one or more grounds, including race, gender, sex, pregnancy, marital status, ethnic or social origin, colour, age, disability, religion, conscience, belief, culture, language and birth.

Discrimination Defined:

The expression “discriminatory” refers to giving different treatments to individuals based primarily on their respective characteristics, including race, gender, sex, pregnancy, marital status, ethnic or social origin, colour, age, disability, religion, conscience, belief, culture, language, and birth. This means that individuals of one particular characteristic may face disabilities or restrictions that those of another characteristic do not face, or alternatively, they may receive privileges or advantages not available to others.

Overview of the Proposed Amendment of Section 42:

Section 42 addresses the right to freedom from discrimination. It safeguards citizens of Nigeria belonging to a particular community, ethnic group, place of origin, sex, religion, or political opinion from discrimination based on these identities. Section 42 (1) guarantees equality before the law, irrespective of sex. Another pertinent provision is Section 17, which asserts that “every citizen shall have equality of rights, obligations and opportunities before the law.” The issue to examine is whether the constitutionally guaranteed equality established in Section 42 is sufficient or merely a case of de jure equality alongside de facto inequality.

There is no definition of discrimination in our Constitution, and it is clear from a reading of s. 42, including the proviso that this provision is not absolute. Question: Will s. 42 apply and nullify any law, regulation, custom or practice which constitutes discrimination against any Nigerian?

New addition on inclusive governance to enhance women’s political participation- proposed amendment to Section 42 by Prof. Joy Ngozi Ezeilo, SAN, OON, Life Bencher

• To consider amending Section 42 (1) to read …. The State, people or institutions shall not discriminate directly or indirectly against any person on any ground, including race, sex, pregnancy, marital status, health status, ethnic or social origin, colour, age, disability, religion, conscience, belief, culture, dress, language or birth. 

• Amend Section 42 of the Constitution by introducing subsection 1 (c) to read… In addition to the measures contemplated in subsections (a) and (b), the State shall take legislative, administrative and other measures to ensure that not more than two-thirds of the members of appointive bodies shall be of the same gender (sex).

• Amend Section 147. (3) to read … Any appointment under subsection (2) of this section by the President shall be in conformity with the provisions of section 14(3) and section 42 subsection 1 (c) of this Constitution: -provided that in giving effect to the provisions aforesaid the President shall appoint at least one Minister from each State, who shall be an indigene of such State, and shall ensure that not more than two-thirds of the list of proposed nominees for the position of ministers submitted to the Senate for confirmation shall be of the same gender (sex).

• Amend Section 192. (1) by introducing subsection 1 (a) to read .. the Governor shall  ensure that not more than two-thirds of the list of proposed nominees for the position of Commissioners of the Government of a State submitted to the State Assembly for confirmation shall be of the same gender (sex).

On State Police:

I support the establishment of state police as an essential aspect of federalism and for effectively preventing and combating crime across Nigeria. Since 2012, I have advocated for community policing, beginning with a memorandum I submitted to the Police Service Commission.

Given Nigeria’s current security challenges and the significant security budgets allocated by state governors—often incorporating unconstitutional, opaque, and unappropriated security votes that facilitate corruption—the time is ripe for state police. Policing should be local.

While there are concerns about potential abuses of power, especially by the state Governors, these can be mitigated through appropriate legislation and by closing any loopholes that could be exploited. This includes ensuring police independence and establishing statutory tenures for police chiefs. Any governor who misuses these powers will be held strictly accountable and face prosecution.

I am also willing to offer my legal services free of charge to help develop a model that interested states can adopt.

Prof. Joy Ngozi Ezeilo, SAN, OON [Ph.D. (Nig.), LLM (London), LL.B. (Nig.), BL, Diploma Peace & Conflict Res (Uppsala)]

Professor of Public Law (BBC recognised 100 Women of Impact in the World 2022)https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-75af095e-21f7-41b0-9c5f-a96a5e0615c1 

Former Dean, Faculty of Law, University of Nigeria (UNN), Enugu Campus.

Former United Nations Special Rapporteur on Trafficking in Persons, especially women and children (August 1, 2008 to July 31^st 2014). Link http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FE_mSntYm8M

Expert Member/Commissioner, United Nations Independent International Fact-Finding Mission on Sudan (FFM Sudan) Dec 2023 to Date- https://www.ohchr.org/en/hr-bodies/hrc/ffm-sudan/index

Member, United Nations Secretary General’s Civil Society Advisory Board on Prevention of Sexual Exploitation and Abuse (2019- 2021).

Founding Director, Women’s Aid Collective (WACOL)/Tamar Sexual Assault and Referral Centre.  Chairperson, Sexual Assault Referral Network, Nigeria- www.wacolnigeria.org

Chairperson,  Nigerian Bar Association (NBA), Justice Sector Reform

Phone: +234-8033062359 Skype: joy.ezeilo2

Email: [email protected] ; [email protected]

Facebook: Joy Ezeilo
Twitter: @NgoziEzeilo
Instagram: prof. joyezeilo

ANNEX: Extracts from the Kenyan Constitution

PROMOTION OF WOMEN PARTICIPATION IN ELECTORAL PROCESS IN KENYA.

1. Kenya has a progressive and transformative constitution which recognizes gender equality and equity.

2. ⁠The Constitution is supreme and prescribes National values and principles of governance. These values and principles bind all state organs, holders of state offices, public officers and indeed all persons.

3. ⁠The values and principles are expressed in Article 10 of the Constitution. Those germane to representation  of women are – the rule of law,  human dignity, inclusiveness, equality, non- discrimination and protection of the marginalized.

4. Chapter four of the constitution provides the Bill of Rights. One of the rights is Equality and freedom from discrimination. Article 27(3) posits that women and men have the right to equal treatment including the right to equal opportunities in political, economic, cultural and social spheres . In addition, both the state and any person are precluded from discriminating another person on any grounds  of sex among others. Article 27 ( 8) is more incisive.It obligates the state to take legislative and other measures to implement the principle that not more than two -thirds of the members of elective or appointive bodies shall be of the same gender.

5. The Constitution at chapter 7 encapsulates General principles for the electoral system. Key among them is the freedom of citizens to exercise political rights and that not more than two -thirds of the members of elective or appointive bodies shall be of the same gender.

6. Article 100 of the constitution caps it all with a compulsive directive to Parliament to enact legislation to promote representation in Parliament of marginalized groups, women inclusive.

7. The above provisions apply in respect of elections conducted under universal suffrage based on the aspiration for fair representation and equality of the vote.

8. It is cardinal to point out that under Article 81 of the constitution, there is a prescription for conduct of free and fair elections free from violence, intimidation and improper influence.

9. In addition ,the Electoral Code of Conduct developed by the Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission and enacted in the Elections Act prohibits gender based electoral violence. This seeks to protect women who participate in elections by insisting on a level playing ground to enable a fair contest.

10. The Kenyan electoral architecture also provides for election for seats in Parliament ( National Assembly and Senate) and County Assemblies on the basis of proportional representation by use of party lists.

11. The Constitution and the Elections Act require that political parties submit to IEBC at least 45 days to the General election date, lists of party members it would desire to stand elected based on the party strength in the respective assemblies.

12. The party lists contains names of candidates in alternate between female and male.

13. The qualification follows  priority listing.

14. The party lists are closed for the entire five year electoral cycle.

15. In the Senate, 16 seats are purely reserved for women .

16. Still in the Senate, 2 slots are provided for youth- one being male and the other female. 2 other slots are also provided for persons with disability – one being male and the other female.

17. At the National Assembly, 12 slots are available for nomination with the lists containing alternates between female and male.

18. Kenya has 47 counties . Each county has a county assembly. In order to ensure compliance with the constitutional principle of not more than two -thirds gender principle , there is usually a provision for gender top up so that no gender falls below one- third representation.

19. In ensuring compliance, the Hare quota formula is deployed. It is based on the number of elective seats won by a political party divide by the total number of elective seats then multiplied by the available seats.

20. There exists a dispute resolution mechanism from the IEBC Dispute Resolution Committee and the Political Parties Disputes Tribunal at the base to the High Court that hears and determines appeals.

The Federal Trade Commission’s long-awaited trial against Amazon begins this week, with the e-commerce giant’s cancellation practices under the microscope.

The lawsuit, filed in 2023 under the Biden administration, accuses Amazon of tricking millions of consumers into signing up for its Prime subscription service through deceptive user interface designs and making it hard to cancel.

“Specifically, Amazon used manipulative, coercive, or deceptive user-interface designs known as ‘dark patterns’ to trick consumers into enrolling in automatically renewing Prime subscriptions,” the FTC complaint said.

It added that Amazon deliberately made it much harder to cancel subscriptions than to enroll in Prime, alleging that the company created a “labyrinthine” cancellation process intended to distract or deter consumers from following through on their intent.

“The bottom line is that neither Amazon nor the individual defendants did anything wrong,” an Amazon spokesperson told CNN. “We remain confident that the facts will show these executives acted properly and we always put customers first.”

Prime, which costs $14.99 per month or $139 annually, is a hallmark of Amazon’s offerings and generates billions of dollars from it. Initially started as an add-on for fast delivery, Prime has ballooned into a multi-pronged service that offers streaming entertainment, grocery delivery, fuel and food delivery perks, as well as subscriber-only deals.

Amazon doesn’t disclose how many US subscribers it has, but a third-party analysis from Consumer Intelligence Research Partners estimates that it has 197 million customers as of March 2025.

The trial is expected to last about a month, with jury selection beginning Monday and opening arguments scheduled for Tuesday. If the jury rules that Amazon broke the law, the judge will decide how much Amazon will pay in damages.

The FTC didn’t immediately respond Monday for comment.

Since 2016, Amazon allegedly maintained a lengthy, multi-step cancellation process it internally referred to as “Iliad Flow,” named after “Homer’s epic about the long, arduous Trojan War,” the complaint said. Other than contacting customer service, Amazon offered no alternative to consumers wishing to cancel apart from going through the Iliad process, the FTC said.

The FTC alleged that going through the Iliad Flow required customers to “navigate a four-page, six-click, fifteen-option cancellation process” that contained numerous off-ramps — including warnings about missing out on benefits, promotional discounts and offers on deals — intended to derail the customer.

Meanwhile, Amazon made it easy to sign up for Prime in just two clicks, the FTC said, and often buried specifics about recurring bills in fine print, the FTC alleged.

Since then, Amazon has made changes: It now has a cancellation page that lays out member’s options on whether to end or pause their Prime membership.

CNN