The Concept of Sulh in Islamic Law: a Case Study of the Practice and Procedure of the Katsina State Sharia Courts
The Concept of Sulh in Islamic Law a Case Study of the Practice and Procedure of the Katsina State Sharia Courts
Abstract of The Concept of Sulh in Islamic Law a Case Study of the Practice and Procedure of the Katsina State Sharia Courts
This study entitled “The Concept of Sulh in Islamic Law: A Case Study of the Practice and Procedure of the Katsina State Sharia Courts”has examined theconcept of Sulh as a type of dispute resolution in which a third party intervenes to help disputing parties reach a mutually satisfactory agreement and the practice thereby in Katsina State Sharia Courts (KSSC). The research work is predicated upon the problem of the volume of cases coming before the KSSC and the latent absence of formal adoption of the rules and principles of Islamic law relating to amicable settlement of disputes within the judicial setting in Katsina State. The main objective of this work therefore, is to offer a highlight on the concept of Sulh as the Islamic perspective of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR). To achieve this, doctrinal and empirical methods of legal research was adopted. It is argued that Islamic law contemplate amicable resolution of disputes some 1400 years ago right from the 7th Century A.D. in advance of any Western move on the subject and in view of this, it was observed that, in its Islamic law conception, Sulh is one of the characteristic features of administration of justice in Islamic law. The findings of the study was that some of the rules of practice and procedure related to the concept of Sulh in KSSC are to a large extent, reminiscent of English style of mediation rules than that of Islamic law per se. Additionally, it was found that much of the current challenges and legal problems associated with the practice of Sulh before the KSSC due to the neglect by the government over the years of affording to Muslims a religiously based amicable dispute resolution as per the provisions of Islamic law. The study concludes with recommendations that Sulhu should be formally recognized as an amicable dispute resolution mechanism alongside adjudication in the KSSC it being more advantageous to Muslims than the Western conception of ADR. It is further recommended that it is expedient that the practice of Sulh shall be extended to the sphere of Islamic criminal justice and in line with this, the Sharia Criminal Code and the Criminal Procedure Code of Katsina State shall be amended urgently to reflect the teachings of Islamic law on the practice of Sulhu in criminal cases. It was also recommended that there shall be accessibility by all persons to the Sulhu-Door facility of the KTMDCH instead of being centralized in Katsina metropolis alone.It is also recommended that theSharia Court Rules and the Sulhu-Door Rules of Katsina State should be amended to additionally reflect the rules and principles of the Shariaor where possible, their replacement with a purely Sharia-based rules of procedure for the Sharia Court and the Sulhu Door respectively.
Chapter One of The Concept of Sulh in Islamic Law a Case Study of the Practice and Procedure of the Katsina State Sharia Courts
INTRODUCTION
Background of the Study
Socially, it is understood that the nature of human being as a social animal indicates that man doesn‟t live in isolation but interact and interrelate with others in his daily life regarding all aspects of human endeavors. And it is natural that once a group of people live together, there may be difference of opinion, thought, taste, temperament, inclination and behavior among individuals which differences may lead to dispute, conflict or misunderstanding among people. When these negative attitudes arose, the Sharia does not leave this kind of disgruntle state of conflict unchecked but provided a means of its resolution. The mechanisms for the resolution of disputes envisaged under the Sharia may take the form of litigation before a court of law (i.e., al-qada‟u) or its amicable settlement (i.e., As-Sulh). Each of these two mechanisms has its own peculiarities. As there are many fields of human endeavors, so do disputes or conflicts arose and permeate these fields – be it social, economic, political, etc., and the Shariah had recognized and institutionalized Sulh (amicable settlement) as a dispute resolution mechanism in addition to litigation so as to restore peace and tranquility among the Muslim Ummah.
Katsina State being one of the 36 States of the Federal Republic of Nigeria has inherited the deeply rooted application of Shariah in its judicial system from the then Sokoto Caliphate.1 Katsina State has also in the year 2000 desired the formal reintroduction or
1 Suleiman, I. A Revolution in History: The Jihad of Usman Dan Fodio, Mansell, London (1986), p. 26; Suleiman, I. The Islamic State and the Challenge of History: Ideals, Policies and application of Sharia in its administration of justice.2 To this end, Sharia Courts were established and conferred with jurisdiction by virtue of the Sharia Courts Law3 to