Justice Served: ECOWAS Court Rules Kano’s Blasphemy Laws Illegal And Unconstitutional

ECOWAS Community Court of Justice has ruled that Kano State’s blasphemy laws violate Nigeria’s international human rights obligations, particularly those relating to freedom of expression.....KINDLY READ THE FULL STORY HERE▶

In a landmark judgment delivered on Wednesday, a three-member panel—comprising Justices Ricardo Gonçalves (presiding), Sengu Koroma, and Dupe Atoki—declared that the blasphemy-related provisions in the Kano State Penal Code and Sharia Penal Code are inconsistent with both regional and global human rights standards.

The case was brought before the court by Expression Now Human Rights Initiative (ENHRI), a Nigerian NGO, against the Federal Republic of Nigeria. The group argued that the blasphemy laws had led to numerous human rights abuses, including arbitrary detentions and death sentences.

In its decision, the court described Section 210 of the Kano Penal Code as vague, lacking clear legal definitions of what constitutes blasphemy, and thereby failing to meet the clarity required by international legal norms.

Moreover, the court condemned Section 382(b) of the Kano Sharia Penal Code Law (2000)—which prescribes the death penalty for insulting the Prophet Muhammad—as “excessive and disproportionate” in the context of a democratic society.

The court concluded that these provisions violate Nigeria’s obligations under the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), particularly those safeguarding freedom of expression.

As a remedy, the ECOWAS court directed the Nigerian government to repeal or revise the offending provisions—and any similar laws—so they comply with Article 9(2) of the African Charter, which protects the right to free expression while also requiring legal restrictions to meet the standards of legality, necessity, and proportionality.

While addressing a related claim of the government’s failure to prevent blasphemy-related mob violence, the court ruled there was insufficient evidence, stating that media reports alone did not meet the required threshold of proof.