It saddens me to see what little regard the society has for the womenfolk of Nigerian communities. It is true that a man is genetically equipped to be the head of the family, but women need not be relegated to the role of mere chef or baby maker of the family. With all due respect, a woman of the house should be fully recognized as an equal partner or at least a deputy to the head of the family. Our very judicial system has been very slow in protecting the rights of women, in marriage, spinsterhood and even during childhood. The most disturbing aspect of it all is that traditions and customs seem to encourage this discrimination, and seek solely to favour men. Recently there has been an increase in rape cases in Nigeria as well as other countries like India and Germany. I am compelled to ask, what kind of deterrence is in place to stop the perpetrators of this heinous crime.
Is there a need for harsher punishments for such an atrocious act?
I would like to draw your attention to the ground breaking decision from the Supreme Court of Nigeria in the case of Ukeje v Ukeje SC April 11 2014 on the law of inheritance and equality between female and male gender. It was a sensational case of a young woman whose father passed away intestate. The deceased's wife and son obtained letters of administration for and over the deceased's estate. When the daughter became aware of this development she filed an action in the court claiming to be the daughter of the deceaseds' hence she was entitled to inherit part of the estate. The court ruled in her favour to the disappointment of the deceased's wife and son. The case was appealed. The Judge at the Supreme court upheld the decision of the lower courts.
It was a total blow to the Igbo culture that seeks to deter females from inheriting from their late father’s estate. This is not only a ground breaking precedent but an intriguing one. Justice Bode Rhodes-Vivour held that no matter the circumstance surrounding the birth of a female child, She is entitled to an inheritance from her deceased father’s estate. Even if a female child is born outside wedlock, that child is entitled to an inheritance from her father's estate. For centuries the Igbo tradition had barred females from becoming beneficiaries of their father’s estates. This judgment practically declared the discriminatory law, null and void.
The court of appeal held that this Igbo custom was discriminatory and was in conflict with section 42 (1a and 2) of the 1999 Constitution.
42(1). A citizen of Nigeria of a particular community, ethnic group, place of origin, sex, religion or political opinion shall not, by reason only that he is such a person:
⦁ Be subjected either expressly by, or in the practical palliation of, any law in force in Nigeria or any execution or administrative action of the government, to disabilities or restrictions to which citizens of Nigeria of other communities , ethnic groups, places of origin, sex, religions, or political opinions are made subject or
⦁ Be accorded wither expressly by, or in the practical application of, any in force in Nigeria or any such executive or administrative action, any privilege or advantage that is accorded to citizens of Nigeria of other communities, ethnic groups, places of origin, sex, religions or political opinions.
Unfortunately we can all be rest assured that some kinsmen will put up some resistance. That is why it is now our duty to spread the word to people especially those that might be in this situation now to know that the law is backing them.
Feel free to add your own voice to this discussion.
Very interesting piece of information. Thanks for sharing.
ReplyDeleteIt is probably relevant to note here that very often women are the most ardent perpetrators of many of these discriminatory practices against women. Also, the average Nigerian is in principle more loyal to his or her tribal customary stipulations than to the Nigerian constitution. In fact most Nigerians have no idea what provisions are in the constitution.
It will be nice if the legal system had a way of educating the Nigerian public about sone of these landmark/groundbreaking provisions in the constitution. One way would be through the return of the subject Civics to our primary and secondary schools. I don't think Social Studies is adequately addressing the topics that were covered in Civics.
I quite agree, people need to be enlightened. This has gone on for too long and surely needs to be addressed.
ReplyDeleteWonderfully written, however I think a lay man might not really understand that the judgement was for EQUAL share between female and male, cos gladdys ukeje ie the daughter of the deceased in the case wanted to also be named as an administratrix of the estate as well and that was granted. The part of the constitution that was resurrected says no discrimination and you as a lawyer and the judges that gave the judgement, understands that as equality in sharing an estate of a deceased. However, a lay man could see it as ok if he gives the female gets this and that but not knowing that what that law is saying is that whatever the male child gets the female child gets within and outside wedlock therefore it's not a case of male giving female or the other way round as rights are equal. NB it's even worthy to note that a family in enugu did that to their female child and she instituted proceedings against her family and without the court usual protracted processes, granted her exactly what she asked for which was what her brother got. The idea in that case is that the law would only protect you to the extent that you seek because it is not a father xmas, so now how do you know the extent of the estate left by your father if not being named as one of the administrators of the estate or shareholders of the company? So to me overall write up was wonderful for a lawyer who knows the law but not very clear as to the extent of the right for a layman. I have witnessed the precedence applied in court.
ReplyDelete@ anonymous 2:55am, you are quite knowledge in this topic my learned friend. Well done and if I may humbly add that for women to seek their right or institute proceedings to actualized same, they should completely disregard sentiments.
DeleteThis is because your fellow women would be the same people that would say "how can you take your own family to court" forgetting that it's not the person that ran out of the fire to get help but the person who started the fire that is at fault, keeping quiet doesn't mean you want peace it simply means you are resorting to unncessary sentiments and therefore telling you daughters that its okay if they are second class citizens or less because our daughters emulate what they see in us, sisters let's stand against all odds to realize and take what is ours.
Slavery has been eradicated for men but women are still as enslaved as they were in the days of roots, may God give us the strength to resist this rape of justice. God bless us women, God bless our daughters, God bless our female generation yet unborn.
This is a topical issue in our society, probably in most part of Africa. It wouldn't be only Igbo tribe that perpetrate this disinheritance of female children. And it is very interesting to note that the woman's rights were restored, in the cited case and even that cited by Annonymous 2.55am, only because the females involved demanded and fought for their right. Rights are hardly given, they are taken. Our women are the ones that have allowed such discriminatory practices in inheritance and many other aspects of our social life to continue for as long as they have. Until we acknowledge our rightful positions and place ourselves there, nothing is certainly going to change.
ReplyDelete