Follow Us on Google
From Abel Leonard, Lafia
A former student of Birmingham University, Adamu Salisu Halliru, on Tuesday, brought a case against the institution at the Federal High Court in Lafia for allegedly expelling him due to his religious practices.
Halliru, who was expelled in October 2023, claims that his fundamental human rights were violated by the university. His legal team, led by I.U. Gale Esq., argues that the expulsion was discriminatory and unjust, targeting Halliru for his Muslim faith.
In an interview with Daily Sun on Tuesday Gale stated, “Our client is a student in the school, they gave him admission and he’s a Muslim. So I don’t know, maybe they found offense in him praying in school. Whenever he prays, it becomes a problem. At a point, they asked him to stop, which he refused. The school authority and security beat him up and injured him.”
Gale further explained that Halliru’s injuries were severe, indicating physical abuse from the university staff. “His body had injuries all over. This was his prayer mat. This is a clear violation of his right to pray,” he said.
The legal counsel pointed out that the expulsion occurred even before the conclusion of a disciplinary panel set up by the university. “They set up a panel after the incident, and before the panel concluded, they expelled him from the school,” Gale added.
The case hinges on several sections of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria. Halliru is alleging breaches of his right to dignity under Section 34, and his right to religious freedom under Section 38, which allows individuals to practice their religion freely, including in educational institutions.
“There is a clear case of discrimination here, which offends Section 42 of the Constitution,” Gale emphasized. “We are seeking redress under Section 46, to enforce his fundamental rights.”
The court has adjourned the case to July 9, 2024, for further proceedings. Halliru’s legal team remains hopeful that justice will be served and that the university will be held accountable for their actions.
“This matter is about fundamental right enforcement. Our client deserves to practice his religion without fear of discrimination or retribution,” Gale concluded.
