N.O.R.F Posted September 25, 2003 A northern Nigerian woman sentenced to death by stoning for committing adultery has won her appeal against the verdict on a majority decision. Four out of five judges rejected her conviction, saying she was not given "ample opportunity to defend herself". Thirty-one-year-old Amina Lawal was convicted last year in Katsina state. She had been found guilty under the Sharia (Islamic criminal law) which has been introduced into 12 northern states over the last three years. The verdict, which had been expected says the BBC's Anna Borzello in Katsina, was read out to a packed courtroom in the appeal court in the northern town of Katsina. The panel of judges said the decision to acquit Ms Lawal was based on procedural errors at her original trial and the fact that her adultery was not proved beyond doubt. Ms Lawal sat throughout the verdict in the corner of the courtroom, her face hidden by a shawl and her child on her lap. A village woman, she had been convicted of adultery in March last year soon after giving birth to her daughter, Wasila. This was the second time she had appealed against her sentence of death by stoning, with the help of two Nigeria women's rights groups which took up her case. While Thursday's ruling means Ms Lawal can go home a free woman, the issue of Sharia and in particular Sharia punishments like flogging for fornication and amputation for theft has not gone away, our correspondent says. Shortly after the verdict, reports were coming in of a Nigerian man being sentenced to death by stoning for sodomy after he allegedly slept with three boys in the northern Bauchi state. The introduction of Sharia punishment has been highly controversial, provoking international concern abroad and sparking religious violence within Nigeria. I dont know much about the ins and outs of this case, nor do i know much about Sheria Law apart from the fundamentals of it ie islamic framework. The question i wud like to ask is how can we allow international govnts to even interfere with the in which an islamic state governs its self? In lands which accept all sorts of non-islamic and immoral practices, we dont hear any Islamic states condemning these practices so why do we allow them to? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SomeAlien Posted September 28, 2003 nigeria isnt an islamic state. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Xafsa Posted September 28, 2003 That ruling was not based on islam or the shariah but rather the love of power by some of those people. Either that or they're ignorant about the religion. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
N.O.R.F Posted September 28, 2003 ma bad somalian, but the whole of the north is under islamic rule, a state within a state if u get me! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SomeAlien Posted September 29, 2003 well i think that has a part in why outsiders feel they can intervene. the whole country isnt united on it so there isnt a strong front regarding shariah law. can you tell me something though, they let her go according to shariah law as well right? so isnt that a victory for muslims? i mean its a small one, i dont like westerners/invaders in muslim territory preaching their ideals, especially in africa, but in islam when concerning executions (i may be wrong) but isnt it better for the "to be executed" to be spared his/ her life? i mean there are very specific ways to make sure the person is guilty , and its always better to spare the persons life right? well if they found her innocent according to shariah, (which these westerners have to study), isnt that good? they might of killed her otherwise and who knows, some of the lawyers might convert. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
N.O.R.F Posted September 30, 2003 "i mean there are very specific ways to make sure the person is guilty , and its always better to spare the persons life right?" of course and i'm happy she found not guilty under sheria, however, the sheer interference by westerners is not healthy. As for ones life being spared under sheria law, even if found guilty, and the offence requires death, i dont think i know enough about our beloved religion or the laws which govern it to make an accurate and meaningful comment. However,we live in a day and age where capital punishment is not acceptable but what is the difference between gassing/lethally injecting someone (ie Texas state)and shooting them in front of others as the Taliban used to? The person will still see death. Over the years societies have developed alternative, more lenient and 'acceptable' ways in which to punish a person (25 to life). I just wished to highlight the fact that a place like the UK can go from the 'gelatine' for the smallest of offences in the Victorian times to a more tolerant society. Having said that, the laws here (UK)are not exactly discouraging ppl from comitting crime, far from it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ferocious Posted September 30, 2003 @N.O.R.F walaalo i saw ur piece in the news the other day and from what i know all the proove they had on her was the fact that she had a child! they didnt specify if she was married the time she had the illegal child(so they call). there alots posibilities to it , she may have been divorced , ( u know how islamic men get , they get mad they say they gave u ur three dalaqs ) or her husband may have been gone for two years and she perfomed "fasqah"(am not sure if that is the right arabic world for it. by the way my point is way iska faqaqday and may have had nikax to this other man she did what she had to do and he left !(hope u know some people get married for the sake of wash kax wash kax) ...........am not trying to be on her side but to be honest , the only way u can kill a person by stonning them to death or by beating them up is when there are three to four witnesses who seen her do the **wash kax wash kax*** namean.................. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
