The traditional leaders in South-West Nigerian have warned against the implementation of Sharia law in the region, claiming it could cause chaos, instability, and division. These concerns arose after a viral flyer announcing the opening of a Sharia court in Oyo State and its environs in January 2025, was shared on X. The largely Yoruba South-West, according to critics, is culturally different from the northern area, where Sharia law is more prevalent. Prior opposition to similar suggestions, such as Bishop Wale Oke’s 2021 warning about clandestine attempts to impose Sharia law during a constitutional review, preceded this debate.
In a joint statement following a gathering to discuss emerging national concerns, the leaders stressed the delicate balance of Religion and Culture in the Southwest. They contended that enforcing Sharia law in an area where there are many different religions would turn off non-Muslims and jeopardize centuries of harmonious unity between different ethnic and religious communities. The monarchs pointed out that the Yoruba people, who rule the Southwest, have long embraced diversity and tolerance as essential components of who they are. They also emphasized how expanding Sharia law beyond its present borders will have constitutional and legal ramifications.
Widespread speculation to expand the sharia court to Osun.
They reminded proponents of such a law that Nigeria is governed by a secular constitution that protects religious freedom and the separation of church and state. In a pluralistic society, they said, trying to enforce religious Legislation could spark widespread civil disobedience and undermine public confidence in governmental institutions. Oyo State’s Christian Association of Nigeria (CAN) rejected the idea, claiming it violated the constitution and threatened the secular character of the state. We will not tolerate anything that threatens our harmonious coexistence, he noted.
Governor Seyi Makinde of OYO state responded to the controversy by addressing the matter and stressing the value of upholding the state’s secular character and adhering to the law. His response has been dispersed on a number of channels, and people are waiting for more government action. This issue particularly gained more momentum in the South-West region after widespread speculation about a proposal to expand the sharia court to Osun after Oyo. Yoruba organizations have categorically opposed the establishment of Sharia courts and the introduction of Sharia law in the South-West.
Debate continues to unfold online on the issue.
Many see such attempts as an imposition that could threaten its cultural and religious diversity, as there is no dominant religion in the region. This development has drawn criticism and worries from users of all backgrounds. Governor Makinde’s strong opposition to the state’s adoption of Sharia law was praised by one user on X, @OfficialSteady_: “I like Seyi Makinde nice, but firm.” Oyo State has nothing akin to Sharia law. Users on other Social Media have also explored the subject, with people voicing concerns that the implementation of Sharia law would result in arbitrary arrests for acts that are considered improper under Sharia, even if they are allowed under the state’s current legal system.
Conversely, some Muslims in the area are against the implementation of Sharia law as they believe it will disturb the current religious unity. “I’m a Muslim & I’m TOTALLY against Sharia law in Yoruba land. All hands should be on deck to ensure that no sharia law is passed anywhere in the Southwest” said by another social media user handle @bin_gbada. The debate continues to unfold online, highlighting the complexities of implementing religious laws in a diverse society and the need for inclusive dialogue to address such sensitive issues.
Related Article: Religious freedom issue persist in Nigeria
In response to the widespread backlash, the organizers have indefinitely postponed the inauguration. The Sharia Committee of Oyo land clarified that their intention was to establish an Independent Sharia Arbitration Panel, not a court, aimed at settling family disputes among willing Muslims without any power of enforcement. The committee emphasized that this panel would operate strictly within the boundaries of voluntary participation and would not possess any legal authority to enforce its decisions. Despite this clarification, the proposal has continued to face backlash, with critics raising concerns about its broader implications for the region’s secular legal framework and the potential for such panels to evolve into more formalized judicial entities.