The purpose of this rejoinder is to clarify that the views expressed by Nafisa Abba do not represent those of Northern Women Lawyers or any legal association.
Her comments reflect her individual disgrace and do not reflect on the legal profession as a whole.
While “charity begins at home,” it is crucial for lawyers to uphold professionalism and integrity in their actions. Our education and ethical training should guide us toward reasoned and respectful discourse.
A failure to embody these principles, despite support from home and within our profession, speaks volumes about one’s character.
Upon reviewing Barr. Nafisa Abba’s recent article (available at Global Tracker), it is evident that her assertions lack evidence and professional merit.
Her failure to appropriately use the term “allegedly” in serious matters significantly undermines her credibility.
Her allegations against His Highness, Emir of Kano Khalifa Muhammad Sanusi II, PhD, are not only unfounded but also defamatory. Following are several troubling statements made by Nafisa:
“It’s under the same Sanusi that thugs would always be seen giving him protection, not the appropriate security agency. Thugs now have access even into the Gidan Rumfa.”
“… ride a horse on Sallah day from the Eid Ground being surrounded by thugs who are loyal to him.”
“We know fully that these organizations that were all over the media condemning an investigative invitation meeting are sponsored by Sanusi to make it public; they are doing all this as pseudonyms, and their organizations are not registered. I’m a lawyer, a member of the Kano Bar. I challenge them to come out and present themselves.”
“CSOs are the creation of the Emir in an effort to sabotage the Nigerian Police.”
These accusations call Nafisa’s conduct as a lawyer into serious question. Nafisa must account for these claims before Almighty God, but in the meantime, a criminal trial should be initiated against her.
If Nafisa genuinely represents the views of “The Northern Women Lawyers,” I demand to know when and where such consensus was reached and to see the minutes confirming her authority to speak for this group. As legal professionals, we understand that the burden of proof lies with those making assertions.
Nafisa must provide evidence of this consensus, or the Northern Women Lawyers and or NBA should take action against her.
Furthermore, her attempt to politicize the esteemed Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) is particularly concerning.
Our professional association should maintain its integrity by remaining above partisan politics. I propose a formal complaint against her conduct to the NBA’s Disciplinary Committee, as her actions threaten to damage the reputation of our profession.
Nafisa criticized the Emir of Kano for participating in the Sallah Durbar despite suggesting that the police banned all such activities for peace. This misunderstanding reflects poorly on her legal acumen and raises questions about her grasp of Islamic principles
Moreover, her statement regarding the tragic death of Ibrahim Alasan lacks substantiation. She must clarify how she knows him to be a mere passerby and identify the alleged “thugs” responsible for his death. I urge law enforcement to investigate Nafisa, as her statements may amount to perjury or complicity in a larger issue.
Real activism requires individuality and accountability, not the guise of collective authority without proper backing. I have independently sought action against figures like Dr. Umar Abdullahi Ganduje, accused of bribery and corruption, though unsuccessfully.
I encourage Nafisa to adopt a more principled approach in her advocacy rather than resorting to childish claims.
Nafisa should also understand that while the police may impose restrictions for security reasons, they do not have the authority to ban the Durbar entirely. The political motivation behind such directives should be challenged.
The Police, are alleged to been aware of potential security threats but failed to manage the situation effectively.
On Eid, attending mosques for the two Raka’at prayer is a fundamental religious practice. Critics may question the Emir’s use of a horse, given police regulations, but riding after the Eid prayer is a Sunnah of our noble Prophet Muhammad (Peace Be Upon Him).
According to Section 38 of the Nigerian Constitution, the Emir is entitled to practice his religion freely, and the police do not have the authority to prevent him from exercising this right.
Ultimately, it is the police’s responsibility to prevent incidents like these, not to restrict the Emir’s religious practices. Had the police fulfilled their duties, this tragedy might have been avoided.
Accountability rests with the police, not with the Emir, who is, in fact, a victim in this situation.
In summary, professionalism and ethical standards compel us to challenge misinformation and protect our profession vigorously but not through the misguided approach that Nafisa has taken.
Stitches in time saves nine.
@ Barr. Badamasi Suleiman Gandu
