THISDAYonline

Muhammadu Buhari,. the suave-spoken, gentle, teetotaller, (so it seems) military generalissimo who, together with Brigadier Tunde Idiagbon of blessed memory, murdered our presidential democracy in 1983 when it was barely five years old, needs no introduction. For his commitment to strict discipline, Buhari, no doubt, still commands respect across the different political divides. His military regime is still being lauded as the best military regime in Nigeria because of its machinery for inculcating discipline. Buhari and Idiagbon understood clearly from the onset that Nigeria was a lawless country. They understood that most Nigerians do not believe in law let alone take interest in obeying the law except they are coerced or compelled to do so. Therefore, Buhari and Idiagbon set about inculcating discipline in the psyche of the average Nigerian by flogging and pillorying the people with native cane called koboko or implementing other forms of corporal punishment. Perhaps, if Buhari and Idiagbon were still in power today, the danfo and molue drivers in Lagos would not. be cruising ferociously on Lagos roads and mesmerising innocent motorists with their dangerous driving. Some say that the secret of the success of Mrs. Dora Akunyili of NAFDAC is that she is applying the Buhari/Idiagbon military tactics. If this is so, the same old question is still relevant. How far can a leader go in compelling the people to obey the law through intimidation and by instilling the fear of punishment in them?. If the people only obey the law out of fear of punishment, it means that once they lose that fear of punishment or once the leader compelling them to obey the law has quit power they will invariably relapse into disobeying the law.

After his short stint as the helmsman of the controversial Petroleum Trust Fund (PTF), Buhari has now bounced back into public reckoning through a seeming palace coup which he executed at the last convention of the All Nigeria People's Party (ANPP). Once a coup maker always a coup maker. Before the other ANPP presidential aspirants could guess what was in the offing, Buhari had shot his way as a consensus presidential flag-bearer of the ANPP. Trust him. That was another successful coup. In his dressing the unassuming-looking gentleman is trying to resemble a true convert to democracy. I guess he has been rehearsing to change his footsteps and demeanour which still depict him as a full- bloom soldier. But his voice still betrays him. When his voice comes it thunders like that of a military man announcing the success of a bloody coup d'etat.

Today, Buhari, as I said, is offering himself for election as the president of Nigeria under the platform of the ANPP. He has said that only God can stop him from becoming the next Nigerian president. Fine. But he should not forget that God acts through men who rely on what they can see to make up their minds. Specifically, most Nigerians are interested in knowing about Buhari's attitude to the Sharia. The reasons for this are quite simple. Buhari was the protagonist, if you like, of the controversial Sharia debates in the 1980s. Religion, as we have been repeatedly told, is a very volatile and sensitive issue especially in Nigeria where owing to the peculiar historical and political origins of the people, some religions have been hijacked and put forth to be used by a few lords as mere instruments of political manipulation. Sharia riot erupts in Nigeria every year. Many lives and property are lost in this yearly riot. It will be a miracle if there will be no riot this year. The last one occurred last year in Kaduna and Abuja. The Obasanjo government promised to bring "the culprits to book". We are still waiting. Essentially, the Sharia in Nigeria strikes at the root of the national question. Each time the debate is renewed, it leaves a big question mark on our claim that Nigeria is one united, indivisible country. Therefore, Buhari has so much to explain about his role in the Sharia episodes in Nigeria. Recently the CNN special programme, Network Africa, had an opportunity of interviewing either Buhari or his aide and the first question was on Sharia. THISDAY recently interviewed Buhari and the second question which the journalist fielded bordered on Sharia.(THISDAY, Saturday, February 1, 2003).

The aforesaid THISDAY interview, to me, provides the evidence that Buhari has not modified his conservative views on the Sharia since the 80s. He starts by saying that he has no personal views on Sharia.

He opines that Sharia is constitutional. That the constitution endorses the implementation of the Sharia as it is being implemented in Zamfara, Sokoto, etc. He sees nothing wrong in executing the death sentence by stoning passed on Amina Lawal if all her appeals fail. In support of his case, Buhari names president Obasanjo and the late Bola Ige as his witnesses stating that the former has told the CNN that the Sharia in Nigeria is constitutional. Buhari, as I said, is stating his personal views not the constitutional provision. First, Obasanjo has not categorically agreed that Sharia is constitutional. He has remained non-committal with respect to Sharia. Today he says one thing, tomorrow he resiles from it and says a different thing. In my view, Sharia is constitutional only to the extent that the 1999 constitution provides for Islamic personal law just as the same constitution provides for customary personal law. But there is no provision of the constitution that states that in keeping with the Muslim personal law we should turn Nigeria into a Muslim State. Section 10 of the constitution clearly states that Nigeria is a secular State. There is a world of difference between secularity and secularism. The constitution forbids the latter which the Muslims detest (and I agree with them) but upholds the former. In plain language, the constitution says, "Every Nigerian is free to practice his/her religion (no secularism) but no Nigerian- must impose his/her religious tenet on Nigeria" (secularity).

But IBB turned Nigeria into a Muslim state during his reign. He dragged Nigeria into the membership of OIC, Islamic bank etc despite all oppositions. He used Decree No.26 of 1986 to extend the frontiers of Sharia beyond the realm of personal law. He used government money in building mosques and sponsoring pilgrimages to Mecca. Today the situation has not changed. I think Nigeria is still a member of the OIC. Ahmed Sani, the strong governor of Zamfara State has continued where IBB stopped. Unfortunately, he and a few others are executing their own personal political agenda under the veneer of Sharia. It was the same governor and his deputy who in their misguided zeal committed the fax paux of passing a fatwa on Ms. Isioma Daniel. Writing from London, Rev. Fr Matthew Hassan Kukah wonders why the fleeing and abandoned poor girl has not returned to her base and job after the governor and his deputy had openly admitted their mistake. If you ask me, I would suggest that the governor and his deputy forward a letter of apology to Daniel considering the damage she has suffered as a consequence of the false fatwa. This is the worrisome thing about the Sharia. Everybody is hijacking it and using it to run his or her private business. The thing is that if these people are doing this without hurting anybody, nobody will be complaining about the Sharia. After all, Muslims are free to follow their Allah-given personal law and nobody has any right to begrudge them for doing that. The problem, as I said, is that in the process, so much harm is done; uncontrollable violence and bloodshed are unleashed in the land. Many are already convinced that the word Sharia only connotes violence. So, rather than worry about the constitutionality or otherwise of Sharia, Buhari should be worrying about the corruption of Islam and the Sharia by some renegades. After all, even if we were to admit that Sharia was constitutional, the fact remains that we still need to purify it being that it has been corrupted by renegades who are using it to pursue their political agenda.

We all know the home truth about the Sharia. And as I keep on saying the Sharia dialogue is a dialogue of the deaf. It is not an intelligent dialogue because the other side reaping profit from the Sharia will never bow to superior argument. So, I don't expect Buhari to modify his views on the Sharia. In fact, he was actually trying to be smart in the THISDAY interview by being economical with words. But what I think he succeeded in doing was to equivocate or quibble with words, looking for excuses for his personal views on alleged views of president Obasanjo and non-existing constitutional provision. I think that Buhari has started badly. He should change his tactics if he intends to make any headway in his ambition to become the next president of Nigeria. He cannot eat his cake and have it at the same time. Presidential democracy is different from autocratic military government that he once headed. Whereas in the latter one can bulldoze one's way by force and issue commands that must be obeyed. But in the former; one must !earn some hard- lessons of democracy before one can make a significant impact.