SECTION 4 THE NIGERIAN LEGAL SYSTEM INTRODUCTION

The first three sections of this course have dealt with general issues that are of major concern in
the sociology of law. In this section, specific focus will be brought to bear on the Nigerian
situation. In discussing the Nigerian legal system, those general concerns would be given
specific empirical content. At the same time, the issues of modern versus traditional or formal
versus informal justice system would be addressed.

This section is made up of five units. The style adopted in writing the first four units which deal
with historical periods in Nigeria's development is the same. The units are broken into the
following six parts:

(a) Overview
(b) Substantive law (i.e. law defining offences and rights)
(c) Procedural laws (i.e. laws defining how to proceed with an alleged offender)
(d) Penal laws (i.e. rules defining what to do with a convicted offender)
(e) Personnel of the justice system, and
(f) The outcome of the justice (especially criminal justice) process.

This uniform approach enables easier and better comparison of the nature and character of the
legal systems during the pre-colonial, colonial and post colonial eras of Nigerian history. In the
last unit, i.e. Unit 5, some thorny issues in the evolution of the legal system are briefly examined.

You should bear in mind that this excursion into the history and development of the Nigerian
legal system is also an excursion into the evolution of the modern from the traditional. For space
and time constraints (Sociology of law is a one semester course), no separate section is created
for a discussion on formal versus informal methods of justice. But such a topic is a very
important part of sociology of law. Attempts have been made in this section to integrate the
concern of such a topic here.

Therefore, the first two units where the pre-colonial legal system of Nigeria is discussed should
also be seen as a discussion of informal or traditional systems of justice. As you will soon

1
discover, the references given there, constitute material on informal justice systems outside
Nigeria. Units 3 and 4 which discuss the colonial and post-colonial legal systems respectively
should also be seen as a discussion of formal legal systems. Unit 3 is a good illustration of the
attempt, even if a clumsy/authoritarian one, to transit from a predominantly informal to a
predominantly formal system of justice.

The overall goal of the section is to familiarise you with the historical development of the
Nigerian legal system while at the same time highlighting the important features of traditional
and modern systems of justice to you. Specific objectives towards that goal are presented in each
of the units.

Unit 1 The Pre-Colonial Legal Order of Nigeria: Southern Nigeria (Prior to 1861)
Unit 2 The Pre-Colonial Legal Order of Nigeria: Northern Nigeria
Unit 3 The Colonial Legal Order Nigeria: 1861 to September1960
Unit 4 The Post-Colonial Legal Order of Nigeria: 1960 to Date
Unit 5 Issues in the Development of the Nigerian Legal System

2
UNIT 1 THE PRE-COLONIAL LEGAL ORDER OF NIGERIA:
SOUTHERN NIGERIA (PRIOR TO 1861)
1.0 INTRODUCTION
The effective colonialisation of Nigeria by Britain began with the cession of Lagos to Britain (in
a Treaty of Cession) in 1861 by king Dosunmu of Lagos. The period before 1861 may therefore
be regarded as the pre-colonial period. During this period, the geo-political entity now known as
Nigeria did not exist. What we had were relatively autonomous tribal societies, each with its own
system of justice administration.

It is nonetheless possible to divide the pre-colonial territory into two major parts based on
systems of justice administration. In the present day northern Nigeria, the Islamic system of
justice, especially the Maliki School brand was dominant, the Fulani Jihadist having first
conquered the area before the British came. In present day southern Nigeria, Justice
administration was largely based upon the customary law system of the different tribes.

In this unit, the focus will be on system of justice administration in the southern part. The next
unit will handle the Northern part. You should note that in discussing the justice system in pre-
colonial southern Nigeria, we are in essence also discussing informal or traditional forms of
justice.

2.0 OBJECTIVES
At the end of this unit, you should be able to:
➢ Describe the main features of the pre-colonial legal order in Southern Nigeria;
➢ Demarcate the various types of laws (such as substantive, procedural, penal), and state
their contents in pre-colonial southern Nigeria;
➢ Specify the elements of informal justice and state the extent to which they still
characterise justice administration in your society;
➢ Understand that pre-colonial African societies had their own systems of justice, which
had its own merits, notwithstanding what western ethnocentric writers would want us to
believe.

3
3.0 MAIN CONTENT
3.1 Overview of the Pre-colonial Legal Order of Southern Nigeria
The pre-colonial era of Southern Nigeria is the period before 1861, when King Dosunmu gave
out Lagos to Britain under the Treaty of Cession. Before that period, the territories that
comprised the present southern Nigeria were relatively autonomous tribes. Each had its own
customary way of administering justice. The concept of nation was not understood as such. But
there were frequent wars. Whenever a particular tribe or Kingdom wanted to expand, it could
overrun its neighbouring town and annex it. In this way, there were powerful kingdoms such as
Benin Kingdom and Oyo Empire. There were also a few coastal towns which had developed as a
result of slave trade, and later produce trades.

In all the villages, towns, kingdoms, and empires, the applicable law prior to colonialism was
unwritten customary law. These are the respective customary rules of the different peoples.
There were no formal or centralised machineries for the enactment, enforcement or
administration of such rules. They have simply evolved from the practices, habits, and previous
decisions of respected arbitrators. Yet the rules were acknowledged and recognised as binding
and obligatory. Negative sanctions were available for non-compliance, and enforcement range
from self-help remedies to enforcement by recognized organs. Although the various divisions of
law as well as purpose of law, are not explicitly recognised or articulated, they nevertheless
existed as we shall soon see in subsequent sections.

In other words, these so-called 'primitive' societies that made up the pre-colonial Southern
Nigeria had their own substantive laws, procedural laws, penal laws, and personnel for the
creation of law as well as is enforcement and administration. In this unit, pre-colonial Southern
Nigeria is treated as if it were one entity. You must bear in mind, however, that each of the
myriads of societies was composed of formed political units with their own notions of justice.
For example, while there were big, centralised political units like the Oyo empire, there were
also decentralised, seemingly leaderless societies like the Tivs and Ibos. And there were
thousands of small units which did not come under the influence of large tribes.

4
3.2 Substantive Laws
The concept of substantive laws is used to denote those bodies of law which defines offences as
well as the rights and duties of citizens. They prescribe and proscribe activities and stipulate
penalties for noncompliance with or violation of the law. Under the heading of substantive law,
we are concerned with issues such as: sources of law, general principles of liabilities under the
law, classification of offences and offenders, the available defenses to criminal liability, age of
criminal responsibility and so on. I am taking the trouble to explain the heading here, (and will
do so for each of the other sub headings of this Unit) for a reason. It is important that you
understand the explanation, because the sub-headings will re-occur in the next three units of this
section. I will assume then that you already know what they mean.

In terms of sources of law in the pre-colonial southern Nigeria, it suffices to say it was
predominantly from the custom of the people. A lot has already been said about custom in the
section above on overview. If you need to know still more, you are referred to section 3, unit 2
where the relationship between custom and law was discussed.

You must note however that custom itself reflects many other kinds of rules, beliefs, folkways,
norms and values which over time crystallize into rules of conduct which the people believe they
are bound to observe. It embraces social morality, ethics, religion and general beliefs of the
people. It also subsumes decisions taken by relevant authorities in new cases, which later become
some sort of judicial precedents for the future. So these other rules either separately, or in
conjunction with custom, constituted the major sources of law in the pre-colonial southern
Nigeria.

The criteria of classification of offences varied from community to community. But

preponderantly, there were distinctions between whether an offence is against an individual,
against the society or against God (or the gods).

They also had their own principles of liability. For example, unless a rule was violated, one
cannot be punished. Accepted defences against criminal liability included age, insanity, mistake
and self-defence. Somebody that is considered a child, insane, or who shot a person by mistake,

5
honestly believing he was shooting an animal, or kills in self-defence was either totally
exonerated or his level of liability reduced. These features characterised all modern systems. It is
wrong to deny their existence under the pre-colonial legal systems or so-called “primitive”
societies just because they did not exist in books but customs.

3.3 Procedural Laws

This refers to rules governing how the justice machinery is invoked against an accused person
and the proceedings that follow thereafter up to the point at which he is set free, made to redress
the wrong or punished for his crime. The major issues of concern here are: sources of such rules,
principles of general liability under the rules, arrest procedure, detention, and the trial process.

In pre-colonial southern Nigeria, the sources of procedural laws were not distinct from the source
of substantive law. They are both derived from custom. Again there is no formal articulation of
principles of liability, but it has been criticised for not allowing for the operation of the principle
of presumption of innocence. In other words, that the way accused people were treated was like
they are adjudged guilty before trial and that it doesn't put burden of proof on the accuser or
prosecutor. The terms used here are a bit legalistic and may not be easily comprehensible to you.
But I assure you that they will become clearer when we get to units 3 and 4. For now, just note
the criticism against customary law on the principle of liability. We shall critically examine the
criticisms in unit 5 of this section i.e. “Issues in the History of Nigerian Legal System”.

In terms of arrest, every member of the society could single-handedly effect, or participate in the
arrest of an accused person. In addition, some societies had institutions such as secret societies
and age-grades which performed the functions of the police and vigilante organisations. Again
there were no formal elaborate procedures on arrests. But it is conceivable that it couldn't have
just been arbitrary. In some societies, the age and standing of the accused person in society
determined who effected the arrest and the manner in which it was effected. Detention facilities
rarely existed and in fact the whole idea of detention and imprisonment was not really part of the
justice system.

6
The trial process itself, varied from community to community. But it was by and large open and
participatory, that is, people were allowed to make contributions, especially those who knew the
disputants’ litigants. In most societies trials were held under big trees or at village squares. The
judges usually were respected elders of the community, but serious cases could go before a chief,
a king, diviners or secret societies.

The most talked about aspect of pre-colonial southern Nigeria Justice process, is the "Trial by
ordeal" system. This entailed making an accused person who denied an offence go through some
ordeal, meant to bring out the truth. It was usually resorted to when there was a strong suspicion
that the accused committed the crime. In some societies, he may be made to swallow poison (e.g.
liquid from the bark of the poisonous sasswood tree), or where it was a woman accused of killing
her husband, she may be made to drink the water with which the husband 'corpse was washed
(this still obtains in some parts of eastern Nigeria today). The accused may also be made to walk
across a deep pit (with dangerous items inside) on a thin rope laid across it. In each case where
the accused survived the ordeal, they were deemed innocent. If otherwise, it was believed that
they were guilty.

This system of trial has been roundly criticised, especially by western writers. They hold that
there is no way of actually knowing its efficacy and that many innocent people may have died in
the process. We shall revisit this argument in unit 5 of this section.

3.4 Penal Measures

This refers to the rules regulating the treatment of an offender after he has been found guilty, as
well as the measures of execution and philosophies behind them. The issues of concern under the
heading include the goal of the measures, the kinds of sentencing options available, and the
rights of convicted offenders. On the whole, the philosophy underlying penal practices in pre-
colonial southern Nigeria tended more towards reconciliation than the modern ideas of
retribution and deterrence. It was more akin to the current trend towards reformation and
rehabilitation. The idea that primitive laws were very harsh and repressive or that penalties were
very severe is not borne out by the experiences of southern Nigeria. Imprisonment was hardly an
option. The closest that any society came to this most frequently awarded sentence for crime in

7
modern societies, was the Yoruba's idea of detaining offenders for a short period that they used
to make restitution. For example, the substantive penalty may be for him to farm for his victim
for three months. For the three months he may be housed in a small hut in the King or Chief's
compound, from where he goes to the farm. Even then, this was reserved for the most
recalcitrant of offenders.

The sentences of pre-colonial southern Nigeria preponderantly tended towards the non-custodial.
Among the available options were restitution, reconciliation, flogging, compensation, self-help,
banishment/exile, and death penalty. But again because of the sanctity of human life, death
penalty was rarely carried out by the community, e.g. such a culprit may instead be taken to a
wild or evil forest (may be bound) and left there to die or be devoured by wild animals. He may
be bound hand and foot, put into a canoe with limited food and set adrift on a river with wishes
of luck if he can untie himself and make a living somewhere else.

Where the offence is such as it is classified as an offence against the gods, the gods were left to
wreck their own vengeance and quite often it was believed that they do.

3.5 Personnel of the Justice System

This heading is straightforward. The issues of concern here relate to the humans or professionals
who man the justice apparatus. For example, in modern societies, organisations like the police,
courts, prisons, and so on, with their professionals who carry out legal functions like
enforcement, adjudication, and correction easily come to mind.

In many pre-colonial southern Nigeria societies, the functions of enforcement, adjudication and
correction were not so rigidly separated, but in others the demarcation was quite noticeable. In
general, the following categories of people played prominent roles in the justice process: secret
societies and age grades were more important in performing the arrest function. But they were
assisted by societal members. In a number of cases, the person wronged or his family or
community is the one on whom the onus of enforcement falls upon.

8
At the trial process itself, diviners, oraclists, witch doctors, elders/elders council, and chiefs/chief
council or king played the dominant role. But since trial was largely participatory, contributions
came in freely from members who have gathered to witness it. Sometimes the dispute may be
just between two individuals, but at the level of the trial, it may translate to between families or
even between villages/communities which the individuals come from.

In terms of enforcing the trial decisions, again it is age grades and secret societies that feature
most. Sometimes however, the individual wronged, (or his family/village/community/tribe) is
required to exert the revenge.

3.6 Philosophy and Outcome of the Justice Process

The overall philosophy which underlain justice in pre-colonial southern Nigeria, was that of
conciliation and restoring equilibrium to society. The overriding concern was to reconcile the
disputant in such a way that no one leaves downcast or puffed up. Both parties were told in clear
terms where they went wrong.

The trial process is more like an informal gathering of caring and council members rather than
stern-looking and impersonal officials that characterize the formal/modern system.

The repressive and punitive cast of primitive society frequently described by western writers was
largely absent. The customary laws reflected the values, beliefs, yearnings and aspirations of the
people. The procedural laws were simple and very effective. The trial process was informal,
quick and very cheap. Penal measures were non-custodial, less punitive but more restitutive.

The outcome at the end of it all was that justice reflected the views of the people, there was
commitment and belief in it, it was convenient and convincing, and was largely devoid of the
rancour and acrimony that characterises present day Nigeria legal system.

9
4.0 CONCLUSION
In conclusion, we can say that, though lacking the sophisticated features of developed legal
systems, societies of the pre-colonial southern Nigeria had their legal systems complete with the
major components expected in any legal system.

In terms of the overall philosophy of the justice system, it looked like it was designed to, and did
indeed achieve a humane, flexible system which ensured equilibrium. This view may however be
contested. Especially by western writers who see non-western legal system as essentially
barbaric, repressive and characterised by rnany repugnant features. We shall join issues with
such writers later in unit 5 of this section. For now however, you may align with any of the
positions with your own justifications, or keep an open mind and wait till after the last unit of
this section.

5.0 SUMMARY
In this unit you have learned that prior to the colonisation of Nigeria, the different autonomous
tribes which now make up the federation of Nigeria, had their own systems of justice
administration. The system was an informal type and based largely on unwritten customary law
in the south (in the next unit you will learn about what the north was like). You have also learned
the meaning of the major divisions of law and have been told that the discussion in the next three
units of this section will be according to the same divisions.

The major position that has been pushed in this unit, especially in its concluding parts, is that the
pre-colonial justice system was humane and served the purpose of justice and society well. It was
however noted that an opposite view exists and you need not be hasty in aligning with my
position.

This unit is long, perhaps the longest in the whole course. But its length is justified on the ground
of laying foundations for all the other units in this section.

10
REFERENCES/FURTHER READINGS
A.O. (1985). The Nigerian Legal System. Ibadan: Spectrum Law Publishing.
Lloyd, D. (1987). The Idea of Law. London: Penguin Books.
Okonkwo and Naish (1980). Nigerian Criminal Law. London: Sweet & Maxwell.
Park, A.E.W. (1963). The Sources Nigeria Law. Lagos: African Universities Press.
T.O. (1956). The Nature of African Customary Law. Manchester: University Press.

11
UNIT 2 THE PRE-COLONIAL LEGAL ORDER OF NIGERIA:
NORTHERN NIGERIA
1.0 INTRODUCTION
In Unit 1 of this section you were told that the pre-colonial Nigeria setting could be divided into
two broad parts for the purposes of discussing justice administration. Unit 1 then dealt with one
of the two parts, namely southern Nigeria.

This unit will focus on pre-colonial northern Nigeria. The approach/style would be just as in unit
1. You will however see that the fact that the Islamic Jihadist had conquered the north and
established the Sharia system before the advent of British colonialist makes their experience
different from that of southern Nigeria, and justifies their separate treatment.

2.0 OBJECTIVES
At the end of this unit, you should be able to:
➢ Describe the main features of the pre-colonial legal order of northern Nigeria;
➢ Delineate the various types of laws and highlight their contents in pre-colonial northern
Nigeria;
➢ Understand the basic features of the Sharia legal system.

3.0 MAIN CONTENT

3.1 Overview of the Pre-colonial Legal Order of Northern Nigeria
The area now referred to as Northern Nigeria was also made up of autonomous tribes who lived
and administered themselves in more or less the same way as Southern Nigeria until the early
19th century when the Fulani Jihadists overran and conquered the territory. By the time the
British Colonial adventure began in Nigeria in 1861, the northern part had been under the
influence of the Islamic rule for close to a century.

The pre-colonial Northern Nigeria that we are concerned with, therefore, is that of the era of the
Islamic rulers. The north was then under a more advanced, centralised political organisation with
Sokoto (where Uthman Dan fodio established himself) as the headquarters.

12
The overall leader of the Sokoto caliphate was assisted by Emirs in different prominent towns.
Islam was not just the dominant religion thereafter, but was also an all encompassing way of life
which also dictated the nature and character of the legal system.

In other words, the north was operating the Sharia legal system. Of course, there were a few
areas in the north (such as Tiv land and much of the present day Middle Belt and Christian
dominated areas in the present north) which the Jihadists were unable (or yet) to penetrate. Those
places operated in ways quite similar to southern Nigeria. Our discussion here shall focus
essentially on the Islamic north.

3.2 Substantive Laws

The basic source of law in the Islamic North was the Holy Koran. The laws are deemed to have
been given by God and so are divine. The laws of the Koran which are necessarily not too
elaborate or exhaustive are supplemented by some recognised subsidiary sources. In order of
importance, these are the Sunnahi Hadith (i.e. sayings and deeds of Prophet Mohammed), Ijma
(unanimous agreement of learned Islamic scholars), Qiyas (Analogical deductions), and Istihad
(subsidiary sources) which included public interest, legal presumptions, custom and "Blocking
the means". Offences are classified according to whether they are contained in the Holy Quran
(Huddud offences), or require retaliatory measures (Qisas), or required discretionary handling
(Taazir). We shall explain these classifications further in subsequent aspects of this unit.

In terms of defenses against criminal liability, age (infant/child), self-defense, mistake, and
insanity were accepted. Intoxication rather than being accepted as a defense was itself deemed to
be a criminal offence and could only compound the problems of anyone citing it as a defense.

One thing worthy of note is that, Islamic law, to the extent that it was largely contained in a book
(Holy Quran), is a written law. The tendency to describe it as a customary law is therefore not
quite correct, because customary laws are unwritten. Nevertheless, for our purposes here, and
from the official view in Nigeria, all pre-colonial laws are deemed to be customary laws.

13
3.3 Procedural Laws
The pre-colonial Northern Nigerian laws on procedure were contained also in the Holy Quran
and other sources. In other words, there was no demarcation between sources of substantive laws
and sources of procedural laws.

The type of offences allegedly committed had implication for procedure and standards of proof.
For example, the standard of proof for Huddud (textually designated) offences was high.
Usually, for testimony of witnesses to be accepted, the witnesses must be sane, male, adult,
usually reliable, and normally at least three in number giving the same account. The Huddud
offences are seven and include: adultery/fornication, scandal, drunkenness, rebellion, highway
robbery/brigandage, apostasy and theft.

Since the political organisation of the north was more developed, it had machinery for justice
administration. There were "local policemen" who effected arrests. Detention was more used
than in the south, and there were judges. The trial process was quite simple but relatively more
formal than in the south. The legal administrative machinery was manned by Islamic legal
scholars mostly.

3.4 Penal Measures

The Shariah system of the pre-colonial Northern Nigeria also gave expression to all the modern
ideas about the goals of punishment. The available penalties revealed a concern with issues of
retribution, deterrence, as well as reformation and rehabilitation.

Again penalties were tailored to conform to the basic classification of offences. For Huddud
(textually designated) offences, the penalties are already contained in the Holy Quran or Sunna
and the judge is not allowed any discretion in awarding the penalties. Once the standard of proof
is met, and the conditions are also met, the judge must give whatever penalty is contained in the
holy books, e.g. for adultery, it is stoning to death, for theft it is cutting of limbs, and for
rebellion it is death.

14
For Qisas offences (i.e. murder or grievous bodily harm) the penalty is retaliation of the victim
(or when victim is dead, the relevant relation), or the victim is allowed to opt for compensation.
So even murder is compoundable under Islamic law. The relation of the deceased can ask for
"blood money" rather than demanding that the culprit be also killed.

For Taazir offences, the judge is allowed to use his discretion in awarding penalties. This
category embraces all offences which are neither Huddud nor Qisas offences. In cases where an
offence is Huddud, but the conditionalities or high standards of proof are not met, the judge may
also treat such as Taazir and award discretionary penalties. Among the sentencing options
available under Taazir are admonition, fines, seizure of property, threat, boycott, public disclaim,
reprimand, exile (which today translates to imprisonment), imprisonment, flogging and death
sentence.

3.5 Personnel of the Justice System

Predominantly, the personnel of the Sharia legal system are learned Islamic scholars. In fact,
knowledge of Islamic principles and teachings is the basis for power wielding in any Islamic
system. This is because the ultimate law on the organisation of an Islamic state is the Holy
Koran. As such, power, whether legislative, executive or judicial is reserved for those who know
what God wants.

The overall head of the Islamic state, i.e. the Caliph, is chosen not based on election or heritage
or any other consideration. The Caliph is supposed to be the most pious and knowledgeable.
Same goes for legislative power (Ijma), judicial power (wielded by the kadis), or spiritual and
intellectual powers (wielded by the Imams).

The more upright, pious and learned one is, the more he could be entrusted with power. In fact,
for the Sharia legal system practitioners need not undergo any legal training. This is because
everything is contained in the Holy texts and being knowledgeable in it implies knowledge in all
spheres of human endeavors.

15
3.6 Philosophy and Outcome of the Justice Process
Since the Islamic religion is a total way of life in which legal relations is embedded, it follows
that Islamic legal system also serves religious functions. So long as people are committed to the
religion, they are also committed to the legal system that it prescribes.

The implication is that people believe in the justice system. They identify with the outcome of
the justice process because it accords with the will of Allah. So just as we concluded regarding
the pre-colonial south, justice in the pre-colonial north was also quick, cheap and convincing.

The Quranic laws are seen as divine, higher and superior laws which man made law should
imitate. It is inconceivable to adherents of the faith that a penalty proscribed by God should be
judged by human reasoning and standards and found to be wanting. This was at the very core of
the recent Sharia crises in Nigeria.

Western writers and Christians described Shariah's punishments such as cutting of limbs for
theft, stoning to death for adultery and flogging for drinking as barbaric and savage. This was
precisely the way the British colonialist saw the laws of pre-colonial northern Nigeria. But the
northern people (Muslims) themselves did not and still do not see it in that light.

It may be concluded, at least from the point of view of those affected, that the justice system of
pre-colonial north ensured stability and equilibrium. The philosophy underlying it was a
religious one. The outcome was peace, harmony and contentment, devoid of the rancor and
wrangling that characterise present day Nigerian legal system.

4.0 CONCLUSION
The conclusion, just as with unit 1, is that pre-colonial northern Nigeria had its own system of
justice administration which in sophistication is comparable to modern legal systems. In
philosophy, it had a religious undertone which did not separate the legal sphere from other
spheres. In outcome, there was a belief in and commitment of the people, at least the Muslim
north, to the legal system.

16
The British colonialists however saw the system as barbaric and characterized by many
repugnant features. In other words, it fell short of the British notion of justice. This issue would
be taken up more fully in Unit 5 of this section. You may wish to read that unit before choosing
which view to align with. On the other hand, if you have already made up your mind, I hope you
can articulate and justify your position.

5.0 SUMMARY
You have learned in this unit that though the pre-colonial Northern Nigeria was not a single
entity, the earlier conquest of large parts of it by the Fulani Jihadist put it on the path to
achieving that. It had a more centralized political organisation with a vast territory under the
political leadership of the Sokoto Caliphate. The territory was administered according to Islamic
principles and the legal system was Shariah-based. You have learned that the Islamic law is
largely written though referred to as customary law. You have also been presented with the
different aspects of law under the system and how religious considerations are paramount. You
may want to read unit 3 of section 2, which was on “Natural law” to have a richer understanding.

You now know how pre-colonial Nigeria was legally administered prior to the advent of the
British colonialists. The decision as to whether their methods were barbaric and repugnant to
natural justice is largely yours to make. But the debate will be revisited later in unit 5 of this
section.

If you had any problem in understanding the discussion under any of the major subdivisions, go
back and read unit 1 of this section where each section contains elaborate statements on what is
expected.

17
REFERENCES/FURHTER READINGS
Bambale, Y.Y. (1998). Crimes and Punishments under Islamic Law. Kaduna: Infoprint.
Chukkol, K.S. (1988). Law of Crimes in Nigeria. Zaria: Ahmadu Bello University Press.
Elias, T.O. (1956). The Nature of African Customary Law. Manchester: University Press.

18