My arrest warrant unconstitutional – Sokoto Hisbah commander

The Commander of Sokoto Hisbah Commission, Dr. Adamu Bello Kasarawa, has explained why they declined to appear before a lower Shari’ah court despite being summoned twice to answer charges by the court. In an exclusive interview with Caliphate Trust, Kasarawa said the bench warrant issued against him and one of his staff was unconstitutional as […]

The Commander of Sokoto Hisbah Commission, Dr. Adamu Bello Kasarawa, has explained why they declined to appear before a lower Shari’ah court despite being summoned twice to answer charges by the court.

In an exclusive interview with Caliphate Trust, Kasarawa said the bench warrant issued against him and one of his staff was unconstitutional as the court lacked jurisdiction to entertain any appeal against their decision.

• Hisbah arrests woman for polyandry in Kano
• Court orders arrest of Commander, Sokoto Hisbah Commission, one other

According to him, the commission, as a legal entity, has the mandate to act and decide on complaints brought before it but there was room for appeal.

“Any of the parties involved that is not satisfied with the decision can seek redress in the court of law and the court will write us, seeking detailed explanation on the matter before passing its judgement.

“The letter must be addressed to the chair, the Commander, Sokoto Hisbah Commission not Adamu Bello Kasarawa as a person because the decision was not taken by me as an individual.

“Yes, one can sue Commissioner of Police, Commandant, NSCDC and the Commander of Hisbah but they don’t appear in person, they only send representative and that was what we did.

“We sent a written representation in which we drew his (the judge’s) attention to the loopholes in their summons and their lack of jurisdiction to hear the cases but the judge insisted on me coming in person alongside the commission’s judge which made us to suspect he was up to something,” he said

Kasarawa also said that all their cases before that court had been transferred to another court following their complaints to superior officers.

On the issue of Hadiza, the commander insisted that there was nothing wrong with their decision to transfer the custody of her child to his biological father because of her alleged immoral behaviours.

“It was the same issue that made her father to curse her when we first arrested her over immoral acts. It took us hours before we convinced him to recant the curse on condition that we will keep her under our care. Then she was breastfeeding and suffering from demons’ attack and cost us over N30,000 to treat her.

“Then she was breastfeeding her child, who remained in her custody until her second marriage when she was rearrested in the room of a man we went to arrest for accused of raping a 13-year-old girl.

“It was then that we invited the father of the child and his people and handed over the child to him after collecting the sum of N30,000 meant to compensate her for taking care of the child for sometimes because she was not fit to raise him.

“So her claim that she was illegally detained, defamed and that we forcefully handed over the child to her former husband is untrue,” Kasarawa said

However, Hadiza claimed ignorance of an agreement between her father (now late) and the commission and the allegation that she was rearrested in another man’s room. She challenged the commission to produce the man.

She also denied the allegation that she aborted a pregnancy for her second husband.

In his reaction, the presiding judge of the lower Shari’ah court, Tudun Wada, Ibrahim Rufa’i, said all procedure under Order 3 and 9 of Shari’ah Court Civil Procedure Rules and Shari’ah Criminal Procedure code were followed in serving them.

“When the case came up for hearing, the court asked the registry if the accused persons were present, or if they sent an apology but the answer was in the contrary.

“The court then asked the bailiff if he served them with the summons and he answered in the affirmative and even tendered a proof of service with their signatures.

“The court then adjourned at their own instance and ordered them to be re-served but they failed to appear. It was on that basis, the court issued an arrest warrant against them because their action was a contempt of the law,” he said

He insisted that the seven cases brought against them are still with his court and the bench warrant is still valid.

The judge explained the summons were addressed personally to them as “It was not Hisbah Commission that was sued but Adamu Kasarawa and Alkalin Hisbah in the different cases which were filed long before he  was appointed the presiding judge of the court.”

He also denied having any personal grudge against them. “I was their friend because I used to offer legal advice to them in the past.

According to Rufa’i, the commander could only challenge the jurisdiction of the court when he appears before it.