Ambiguities of Colonial Law: the Case of Muhammadu Aminu, Former Political Agent and Chief Alkali of Kano

I

Colonial law in Africa involved European moral and legal codes representing some rules of western law, as well as elements of African customary law. However, the colonial situation embodying political and economic domination necessarily negated the ideal practice of the rule of law.¹ Nevertheless, the need arose to introduce some aspects of western law and codes of administration, including salary and benefits schemes for African employees of the colonial government, and legal entitlements such as court trials for accused government employees. These considerations were deemed necessary, if at least to propitiate metropolitan critics of the colonial establishment.² Also some rule of law was required for the organization of the colonial economy, including regulation of productive systems and commercial relations. As well, the need for indigenous support necessitated dabbling in indigenous customary conventions. In Muslim polities such as Kano in northern Nigeria, customary conventions included Islamic law.

On the establishment of colonial rule in Kano, judicial administration was organized on three principal institutions, involving the resident's provincial court, the judicial council (emir's court), and the chief alkali's court in Kano City with corresponding district alkali courts. The resident's provincial court had jurisdiction over colonial civil servants, including African employees such as soldiers, police constables, clerks and political agents. Also, the provincial court was responsible for enforcing the abolition of the slave trade in the region.³ The judicial council, classified as "Grade A" court, was composed of the emir, the waziri (chief legal counselor), the chief alkali of Kano (chief judge), the imam (the religious leader of Kano mosque), the ma'aji (treasurer), and general assistants including some notable scholars of Kano city. The council adopted the sha'ria (Muslim law) and local Hausa custom, and its jurisdiction extended over "matters of violence, questions of taxation and administration, and cases involving property rights, whether over land, livestock, trade goods, or slaves."⁴ On the issue of capital sentencing, the judicial council required the approval of the resident. The council was also prohibited from authorizing punishments involving torture, mutilation, or decapitation.⁵

The district courts ranked as "Grade B" courts; they too administered Islamic law with local customary conventions, and they handled routine and civil affairs such as marriage and divorce, as well as minor criminal disputes. The district court was led by an alkali, with the assistance of a scribe. The chief alkali's court, ranking in "Grade A," would also handle commercial cases, and with the judicial council, serve as court of appeal from the district courts. In Kano city the chief alkali's court was assisted by a grade "C" court. In essence, colonial judicial administration in Kano and many parts of northern Nigeria largely depended on alkali's courts, reflecting the significance of the alkali in colonial establishment.⁶

Candidates for alkali were drawn from Islamic scholars. Such scholars included Arabists and mallams, some of who enlisted as scribes and doubled as political agents in colonial administration.⁷ Of the scribe-political agents, their duties involved gathering intelligence, translation of Arabic letters and court papers, and keeping records of native laws for judicial officers, as well as filing tax assessment sheets for districts, towns, and villages.⁸ Some of the scribe-political agents who served in Kano province were Mallam Sani and Mallam Jafaru.⁹ Knowledge of Islamic and customary laws, court procedures, as well as government orders and conventions, equipped the scribe-political agents as attractive candidates for the position of alkali in the event of a crucial need in indigenous administration.¹⁰ In this context Muhammadu Aminu would emerge as chief alkali of Kano.

Enforcing colonial law was not clearcut and straightforward anywhere in British Africa, as

British administrators often opposed codifying customary law in order to maintain their ability to respond flexibly to different situations. As a result, Africans determined the content of the law in the course of individual decisions in which they provided a more nuanced interpretation of the law than colonial constructions allowed.¹¹

This is...