Persecution Of Christians In Nigeria And The Recent Federal Government’s Fees Regime For christian Marriage – Catholic Herald
Catholic Herald
  • Home
  • Cover Story
  • Editorial
  • Archbishopric
  • News
    • Vatican News
  • Homily
  • Kids &Teens
  • Gallery
No Result
View All Result
Catholic Herald
No Result
View All Result
Home Feature

Persecution Of Christians In Nigeria And The Recent Federal Government’s Fees Regime For christian Marriage

by admin
February 2, 2020
in Feature
0
491
SHARES
1.4k
VIEWS
Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  1. Introduction

The recent directives from the Federal Min-
istry of Internal Affairs under Mr. Rauf Areg-
besola as the Honourable Minister is discrim-
inatory, and a bare-faced attack on the right to

freedom of thought, conscience and religion

of Christians enshrined in the extant Consti-
tution of Nigeria, the 1999 Constitution. The

Order provides a fee of N30,000.00 for a place
of public worship to be licensed for statutory
marriage. It provides also a fee of N21,000.00
for every certificate of marriage to be issued

to a married couple. This fee regime is worri-
somely discriminatory as it is directed to ma-
jorly Christian marriage whereas Islamic law

marriage and marriage under customary law
are clearly excluded. In short, these two forms
of marriage are completely not regulated by
the government. Muslims and traditional
religionists marry when they want, how they

want and without making any form of pay-
ment to the government. Rather the govern-
ment financially supports them, and it can be

said that the government supports them with
revenue generated from Christian marriages.
Payment of fees is not the only burden placed
by government on the marriage of Christians
in Nigeria. This paper traced the legal roots

of these discriminations of Christian mar-
riage proximately to the marriage statutes and

ultimately to the Constitution. It exposed the

erroneous jurisprudence on which the perse-
cution often Christian marriage is anchored

in Nigeria. It calls for a review of the marriage

statutes and the amendment of the Constitu-
tion with a view of putting in place a marriage

regime that treats all forms of marriage, reli-
gious and otherwise equally as is the case in

Ethiopia. For the mean time the paper recom-
mends that Christians should reject the fee

regime imposed by the Ministry of Internal
Affairs as it is discriminatory, oppressive and
unconstitutional.

  1. Christian Marriage and the Nigerian

Marriage Statutes: Unconstitutional Discrim-
ination and Persecution

Marriage is a natural institution through

which family is formed and the indispen-
sability of family as the smallest unit of the

society redounds to marriage being an indis-
pensable social institution. It is at the same

time a religious institution given that many
religious have their doctrinal regulations of

it. It is unarguable that religion is a phenome-
non that is inherently connected to the nature

of a human being as a rational being, homo
sapiens, who reaches out beyond himself
in auto-transcendence to connect with the
divine, the ultimate reality. It is for this fact

that right to freedom of religion is universal-
ly recognised as a human right. It is on the

basis of this that there are religious forms of
celebrating marriage. For examples, there are
Christian, Jewish, Hindu and Muslim forms
of marriage. In Nigeria, there are also forms
of marriage according to traditional religion.
Besides religious forms of marriage, there is

what is referred to as Statutory form of mar-
riage, that is, that form of marriage created by

the State through legislation. The status of re-
ligious forms of marriage within a State vary

from country to country. Whichever status
model adopted by a State, what is important
is that the State recognises religious forms of

marriage and treats all religious forms of mar-
riage equally based on the equality of citizens.

In a country like the United States of Amer-
ica, where however marriage is regulated by

individual States unlike Nigeria where it is
regulated by the Federation, all the different

legitimate forms of marriage, religious or oth-
erwise, enjoy civil effect subject to compliance

with conditions imposed by the State. One
such condition is the requirement of State

licence to marry. One thing about this struc-
ture of things is that the condition applies to

all legitimate forms of marriage, religious or

otherwise. A marriage conducted accord-
ing to Christian or Islamic form of marriage

will produce civil effect only if conducted
in accordance with the conditions imposed

by the marriage statute. In effect the condi-
tions specified by the marriage statute are

common to all legitimate forms of marriage.
Similarly, religious forms of dissolution of
marriage follow this subordinated structure.
But the situation is different in a country like
Ethiopia. In Ethiopia the different legitimate
forms of marriage, religious or otherwise,
have independent and equivalent status. All
have legal effects. Article 40 of the Ethiopian
Revised Family Code, titled, “Various Forms
of Marriage Equivalent” states in subarticle
1: “Marriage produces the same legal effects
whatever the form according to which it has
been celebrated.” Subarticle 2 goes further
to say: “No distinction shall be made as to
whether the marriage has been concluded
before an officer of civil status or according to
the forms prescribed by religion or custom.”
By that token, a marriage celebrated solely
according to a religious form of marriage has
legal effects in the State without the religious
body having first to satisfy some laid down
statutory preconditionslike registration of
place of worship, notifying the registrar of
marriage and getting the licence to marry,

et cetera. Under this structure, every reli-
gious form of marriage is in effect a statutory

marriage sui generis. Similarly both religious
forms of marriage dissolution and marriage

dissolution before the officer of the State op-
erate collaterally as equivalents (See Article

74, Ethiopian Revised Family Code)
Different as the America and Ethiopian
models of marriage legislation are, they are
one in treating, at least, all religious forms of

marriage equally. No religious form of mar-
riage is singled out for special favour or priv-
ilege. In so doing the legislation respects and

promotes the right to freedom of thought,
conscience and religion as well as the right to
freedom from discrimination.
Unfortunately, Nigerian Marriage
Statutes, namely the Marriage Act and the

Matrimonial Causes Act, the statutesregu-
lating respectively the formation of marriage

and matrimonial causes in Nigeria, fail to

meet this basic principle of fairness and jus-
tice. They are designed to regulate only mo-
nogamous marriage which Christians favour

whilepolygamous (polygyny) which Muslims
and Traditional religionists favour are not so
regulated. The result is that their marriages

enjoy automatic legal civil effects. Numeri-
cally, Christianity and Islam run neck to neck

in Nigeria as the religions of the majority of
the people. The population of the adherents

of traditional religion is more or less insignif-
icant when compared with the population of

these other two put together. The effect is that
marriage legislation that excludes Muslims
and traditionalists is practically a legislation
tailored for Christians. The ultimate root of
this discrimination and injustice is the 1999
Constitution which in giving the National

Assembly the exclusive competence of mar-
riage excludes competence over Islamic and

customary law marriages. This competence

is listed as item 61 of the Exclusive Legisla-
tive List and it reads: “The formation, annul-
ment and dissolution of marriages other than

marriages under Islamic law and Customary
law including matrimonial causes relating
thereto.” On the basis of this discriminatory
mandate the Marriage Act does not regulate
the formation of Islamic and customary law
marriages. It does not demand that Muslims
or traditional religionist register their places
of worship, or notify the marriage registry
prior to their marriage or secure the licence
of the marriage registrar before they marry
in their places of worship. Neither does the
Marriage Act require them to pay any form of

fees for their marriagr or require them to cel-
ebrate their marriages at a particular period

of the day as is the case with the marriage of

Christians. In the same vein, the Matrimoni-
al Causes Act does not regulate matrimonial

causes arising from polygamous marriages,
nay, Islamic and customary law marriages.

A marriage dissolved in accordance with Is-
lamic law or customary law is recognised by

the State as duly dissolved whereas a decree
of matrimonial annulment decreed by, for
instance, by an ecclesiastical tribunal of the

Catholic Church does not enjoy such recog-
nition.

One may argue that Christian marriage can

readily be considered as customary law mar-
riage judging from the nature of customary

law. Customary law generally is a mirror of
accepted practice. It is a practice accepted by
a community as having the binding force of
law. Christian form of marriage isaccepted
within the Christian community as having
the binding force of law. Be this as it may,
the dominant jurisprudence currently in
Nigerian legal systems favours the thinking
that customary law marriage is essentially
polygamous and refers only to the marriage
of traditional religionists Muslims whereas

statutory marriage is essentially heteroge-
neously monogamous and so refers to the

marriage of Christians. This, though, is erro-
neous. The explicit references to churches in

the Marriage Act go to support the erroneous

jurisprudence that statutory marriage is es-
sentially for Christians as it is a monogamous

form of marriage. For instance, section 21 of
the Marriage Act provides:
Marriage may be celebrated in any licensed

place of worship by any recognised minis-
ter of the church, denomination or body to

which such place of worship belongs, and
according to the rites or usages of marriage
observed in such church, denomination or
body.
Judicial pronouncements also support this
erroneous perception. For instance, Palmer,
J., in Obiekwe v. Obiekwe stated: “So far as
the law of Nigeria is concerned, there is only
one form of monogamous marriage, and that
is marriage under the Ordinance. Legally a
marriage in a Church (or any denomination)
is either a marriage under the Ordinance or it

is nothing.” This means that in so far as Chris-
tian marriage is monogamous, it can have le-
gal effect in Nigeria if it is celebrated subject

to the Marriage Ordinance. In other words, as
things stand under the current Nigerian legal
system there is no safe haven for Christian

marriage and Christians from the discrimi-
nation and persecution hatched by item 61

of the 1999 Constitution. This underscores
the weaknesses of the 1999 Constitution as

a product of the military rather than a dem-
ocratic charter produced by 3. Effect of the

Discriminatory Statutory Marriage Regime:
Persecution
The effects of the discriminatory statutory
marriage regime in Nigeria are multifarious.
A Muslim or a traditional religionist can
marriage according to the form prescribed

by his faith and the marriage enjoys auto-
matic legal effect in Nigeria and by extension

internationally whereas a Christian does not
enjoy such a liberty. No statement brings out
more lucidly the underdog status forced on
Christians under the Marriage Actthan the
statement of Palmer, J. Obiekwe v Obiekwe

[(1963) 7 ENLR 196]. In this case, the de-
fendant married solely according to the Ro-
man Catholic Law, without complying with

the requirements of the Marriage Ordinance.
Palmer, J., held:
A good deal has been said about ‘church
marriage’ or “Marriage under Roman
Catholic Law.” So far as the law of Nigeria

is concerned, there is only one form of mo-
nogamous marriage, and that is marriage

under the Ordinance. Legally a marriage in
a Church (or any denomination) is either a

marriage under the Ordinance or it is noth-
ing. In this case, if the parties had not been

validly married under the Ordinance then
either they are married under Native Law and

Custom or they are not married at all. In ei-
ther case the ceremony in church would have

made not a scrap of difference to their legal
status. (at 199)
Even though this is a judgment of a high
court, it remains the law on the matter until
set aside by a superior court. This judgment
analogically applies to matrimonial relief,

such as marriage nullity, decreed by an ec-
clesiastical tribunal. Such a decree would not

make a scrap of difference to the legal status
of the parties until the marriage is dissolved
by a civil court.
With the compulsory subordination of the
marriage of Christians to the Marriage Act,
t he right of Christians to live and practice
their religion is subjected to hardship, costs,
c onditions which Muslims and traditional

religionist are not subjected to in Nigeria con-
trary to section 42 of the 1999 Constitution

o f Nigeria that prohibits discrimination on

the basis of religion.With the exclusion of Is-
lamic law and customary law marriages from

t he legislative competence of the National
Assembly, Christian marriage as a religious
form of marriage is left at the mercy of the
government of the Federation. The National
Assembly can make any rule it pleases on the
marriage of Christians. The rules include the
onus of:
( a) Having places of worship licensed for
m arriage. Section6(1) of the Marriage Act
states: “The Minister may license any place of

public worship to be a place for the celebra-
tion of marriages, and may at any time cancel

such license; in either case he shall give no-
tice thereof in the Federal Gazette.

(b) Every intending couple placing a notice
of marriage with the State. (s. 10, Marriage
Act)

(c) Every intending couple obtaining a li-
cence to marry from the State . (s. 11, Mar-
riage Act)

(d) Payment of fees to government for mar-
riage, (s. 36, Marriage Act)

( e) Celebrating marriage only within the
time frame specified by the State (ss. 12, 21,
Marriage Act),
( f) Christian religious Minister forbidden
to celebratemarriage according to Christian
form without the registrar’s certificate, (s. 22,
Marriage Act)
(g) Restricting Christian marriage only in

the building licensed by the Minister of In-
ternal Affairs (s. 23)

(h) Exchanging marital consent only in the

manner prescribed by the State. (s. 21, Mar-
riage Act)

(i) Signing government certificate of mar-
riage after celebration of marriage (s. 26, Mar-
riage Act)

(j) Transmitting a copy of signed certificate
of marriage after celebration of marriage to

the marriage registrar and a person who will-
fully neglects to make the transmission shall

be liable on conviction for two years impris-
onment. (s. 43, Marriage Act).

Section 33(2) of the Marriage Act makes a

marriage null and void if both parties know-
ingly and wilfully acquiesce in its celebration

u nder certain conditions. These conditions

include: (a) in any place other than the of-
fice of a registrar of marriages or a licensed

place of worship (except where authorised
by the license issued under section 13 of this
Act); or (b) without a registrar’s certificate
of notice or license issued under section 13
of this Act duly issued; or (c) by a person

not being a recognised minister of some reli-
gious denomination or body or a registrar of

marriages. Neither Muslims nor traditional
religionists are subjected to these conditions
in order for their marriage to have legal effects
in the county. These conditions, impede, and
undermine the right to freedom of religion of

Christians and their civil equality with Mus-
lims and traditional religionists.

These statutory hurdles do not simply un-
dermine Christian marriage but also con-
stitutes discriminations against Christians

as citizens. One hallmark of democracy is
equality of citizens and the equality of their

rights. This is undermined by the discrimina-
tory marriage statutes which echo inequality

at different levels in the life of the country.
(a) At the National Assembly: Muslims
and Traditionalists sit to make laws on how
Christians marry whereas Christians do not
have the opportunity to legislate on how they
marry.
(b) In Marriage Administration: Muslims
and Traditionalistsadminister the Marriage
Act by superintending over the marriage of

Christians either as marriage officers or regis-
trars whereas Christians cannot exercise sim-
ilar offices over their own marriages.

(c) In the Judiciary: Muslims sit as judges
hearing and determining marriage cases of

Christians whereas Christians cannot exer-
cise the same role over their marriages be-
cause Christians do not sit in Sharia courts.

What the discriminatory statutory mar-
riage regime has createdin Nigeria is an un-
mitigated apartheid against Christian mar-
riageand Christians. Christians and their

marriage are isolated for persecution and
suppression. It is under this environment that
the present government through the Ministry

of Internal Affairs under Chief Rauf Aregbe-
sola, a Muslim, rolled out the oppressive fees

regime that is meant

Share196Tweet123Share49
admin

admin

  • Trending
  • Comments
  • Latest

The 12 Articles of the Creed

June 14, 2021

Examination malpractices: Who is to blame?

July 10, 2021

Keep it short and simple

July 10, 2021

Agenda for in-coming Lagos State Governor

0

Fathers And The Omugwo Train

0

Married Pentecostal Pastor Set To Become Catholic Priest

0

A new dawn: Catholic Bishops to FG, state governments

June 5, 2023

Holy Kiss as metaphor for the Trinity

June 5, 2023
Now that 2023 general elections are drawing near

Nationwide chaos over subsidy removal

June 5, 2023
Catholic Herald

© 2023 | Xebrian

Navigate Site

  • Home
  • Mixed Grill
  • Interview Section
  • Spirituality
  • Sports
  • Health
  • Technology
  • Gallery
  • Back Page
  • Contact

Follow Us

No Result
View All Result
  • Home
  • Cover Story
  • Editorial
  • Archbishopric
  • News
    • Vatican News
  • Homily
    • Spirituality
  • Mixed Grill
  • Interview Section
  • Sports
  • Technology
  • Health
  • Kids &Teens
  • Gallery
  • Back Page
  • Contact

© 2023 | Xebrian