By Maiwada Dammalam



The proponents of the murder of Mrs Bridget seem to be missing the most basic ingredient of this case, its poverty of logic, common sense and simple ability to respect rule of law. It's not about what Islam sanction for blasphemy as they continuously argue emptily but, first, about establishing the guilt of the murdered woman, second the inappropriateness of dispensing justice by mob action.

Now, please somebody convince me that the woman truly blasphemed by abusing Nabee Muhammad SAW. What exactly was it she said because all I'm hearing was she blasphemed yet, nobody seem to have an inkling about what she said that constituted blasphemy as defined by Islam or our local laws yet, she's already irreversibly dead; arrested, charged, tried, witnessed, convicted and executed by a single judge - the mob, all in a single sitting of the "court". So much for "nemo judex in causa sua" as members of the learned clan would say.

Most importantly, if members of this "Express Court" truly believe she deserve to die for a hazy and unverified offense for which she was not found guilty by a constituted authority, why is it they are not doing anything about Abdulaziz Dauda, alias "Nyass" who blasphemed in public and on camera, and whose evidence of blasphemy is still being shared on whatsapp. Dauda was charged to court and was convicted to death for the offense yet, he's still living on death row since January 2016 in the same Kano. Why was Mrs Bridget refused the same courtesy of a fair judicial process by the hyper-active albeit ignorant mob?

Yes, you will say Dauda is in a heavily guarded prison therefore out of reach to the mob. But, in the same Kano in 1996 Gideon Akaluka was kept in prison while his crime of blasphemy was in progress yet, was brought out by a mob and executed.

According to reports, Akaluka was not even the offender. His wife was said to have torn a piece of the Holy Quran and used same as toiltet paper. But some muslim youths in the city went after the husband. Akaluka was simply guilty by association if that makes any judicial sense.

Repulsive as the crime of desecrating a holy religious text could be, how does being married to somebody crazy enough to do so constitute a capital offense? Allah SWT will never judge Akaluka for the offense of his wife yet, a charged mob murdered him in cold blood thinking they did it to please a just, merciful, fair and benevolent Allah Subhanahu Wata'ala! That killing was more repugnant than the offense. Please note, I'm discounting the discrepancies in the narratives of the mob's "FIR" on which his conviction was based.

The question of guilt in serious issues like capital punishment is something that shouldn't be toyed with regardless of what belief the offender subscribe to. Islam went as far as to protect the welfare of animals down to those it sanctioned we could kill for our nutritious needs. Nothing was left untouched under Islam as far as life is concerned.

I don't believe the Islam that sanctioned "Whoever kills a person (unjustly)...it is as though he has killed all mankind. And whoever saves a life, it is as though he had saved all mankind.” (Qur’an, 5:32) on one hand, would turn on the other hand to leave the application of capital punishment in the hands of probably "codeine" charged mob.

Now who would know if Mrs Bridget was killed for reasons related to "market politics" and, if we should know, how could the irreversible verdict be reversed? Isn't that enough reason to subject her to proper judicial process to determine her guilt before taking an irreversible action?

A question I would like to ask any member of the "court" that sentenced and executed her is, would they have acted in the same manner under the same situation in Onitsha or Aba markets? Certainly no! Their zeal to punish blasphemy is definitely proportionate to their majority population in direct relation to the victim's minority number. Assuming she did what they claim she did, she would have gotten away with it without a single one of them blinking an eye to indicate he notice she blasphemed if it were Onitsha/Aba market. By this, it's easy to conclude that the judgement was not based on conviction of faith but conviction of strength.

I will go as far as to say majority of the mob that convicted and executed Mrs Bridget will not hesitate a moment to wear a "Cross", clutch a holy Bible and start singing "Halleluyah" to get out of a volatile, life threatening situation in Enugu, Awka or Uyo where they are certain about their weakness as minority.

If they could REASONABLY go this far to save their necks, why were they so reckless as to risk the lives of their brothers and sisters who are in the minority in the South as Mrs Bridget was a minority in the North? Certainly, somebody is not under the silly assumption that there are no crazy people in the South who could pay back actions of crazy people in the North using same measure reasoning.

Until we answer these questions, I don't think anybody would be convinced about the correctness of this crazy "judicial" process. Arguing that death is the punishment for blasphemy is completely off the mark. It's simply an effort to cover up criminality and, though it may serve your interest today, certainly it will work against you some day. Actually that's the purpose and logic for respect to rule of law. It serves and protect everybody without recourse to belief.

By the way, if Allah SWT wanted to have a community ruled by senselessness, HE wouldn't have blessed us with a sense of reasoning. Just because you are comfortable in Kano today doesn't mean you would never be a minority somewhere, some day. The earlier we get used to expectations on us to behave a level above animals the better for humanity.

You can reach him on fb

https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=1026885884014180&id=100000783337127&refid=7&_ft_=qid.6293446730604286051%3Amf_story_key.-1337204742488553765&__tn__=%2As

A question I would like to ask any member of the "court" that sentenced and executed her is, would they have acted in the same manner under the same situation in Onitsha or Aba markets? Certainly no! Their zeal to punish blasphemy is definitely proportionate to their majority population in direct relation to the victim's minority number. Assuming she did what they claim she did, she would have gotten away with it without a single one of them blinking an eye to indicate he notice she blasphemed if it were Onitsha/Aba market. By this, it's easy to conclude that the judgement was not based on conviction of faith but conviction of strength.

This is really a big question.

her soul rest in peace