Home spotlight Flogging of TikTokers: Lawyers recount how Kano magistrate court violated the constitution

Flogging of TikTokers: Lawyers recount how Kano magistrate court violated the constitution

0

Mubarak Isa Muhammed and  Nazifi Muhammad Bala, the two TikTok stars that received 20 strokes of cane as well as the additional sentence of ten thousand naira about £20) fine each, and cleaning of the court premises for 30 days for defaming Alhaji Abdullahi Ganduje, the governor of Kano State are still smarting over their humiliation.

A Magistrates’ court in Kano presided by Aminu Gabari found them guilty of defamation and sentenced them summarily.

Nigeria has seen a speedy increase in TikTok users in recent years, particularly among young people who oftentimes mock public figures, including government officials, by clipping images or videos to create comedies that attract massive followers to their accounts.

Legal practitioner, a former prosecutor in the District of Columbia, and member of the Maryland bar, Chief Chukwuma Odelugo described the entire case as a mockery of the rule of law.

According to Odelugo, “while I don’t know specifics about the criminal laws in Kano State, I doubt that the laws allow for the sentence of flogging and cleaning public toilets. Leaving aside the fine for a moment, every sentence under the criminal laws of Nigeria is subject to section 34 of the Constitution.

“Under 34(1)(a), every individual is entitled to respect for the dignity of his person, and no person shall be subject to torture or to inhuman or degrading treatment. And to this particular admonition, there are no exceptions.

“The Court probably read (1)(c) portion of section 34, which contains exceptions for prisoners. But 34(1)(a) doesn’t have any exceptions. Even then, the exception under subsection 34(1l)(c) only applies to prisoners. These people were not prisoners.

“The only purpose of this criminal prosecution was to humiliate them. And the Constitution doesn’t permit it.”

Likewise, the director of Amnesty International Nigeria, Osai Ojigho, expressed concern over the decision.

Ojigho in a statement stated that the authorities must quash the flogging sentence of Tik-tokers, noting that satirising those in authority is not a crime.

She said: “Amnesty International condemns the sentencing of Tik-Tokers, Mubarak Muhammad (Uniquepikin) and Nazifi Muhammad for allegedly defaming the governor of Kano in Northern Nigeria.”

Adding that the decision to remand them in prison for a week without trial was a brazen violation of their fair trial rights, Ojigho insisted that the authorities immediately and unconditionally release the two entertainers, as they are sentenced solely for peacefully exercising their human rights.

On the issue of flogging, the Constitutional Court of South Africa considered together five cases in which six juveniles were sentenced to receive a “moderate correction” of a number of strokes with a cane. It set out to examine whether the sentencing of juveniles to whipping under the Criminal Procedure Act was consistent with the Constitution.

The court however noted that consensus had been reached that legal provisions allowing corporal punishment of adults are inconsistent with the Constitution. Read more at https://endcorporalpunishment.org/human-rights-law/national-high-level-court-judgments/south-africa-1994-and-2000-constitutional-court-judgments/

NO COMMENTS

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

Exit mobile version