(By Fr. Maurice Kwairanga)
The emerging reports that some landlords in Adamawa State now condition tenancy on a prospective tenant’s religion or ethnic identity present a troubling affront to Nigeria’s constitutional order and moral foundations. Such practices are not merely socially undesirable—they strike at the heart of the legal architecture designed to protect equality, human dignity, and national cohesion. From both a jurisprudential and philosophical standpoint, discrimination in access to housing is indefensible and corrosive to the ideals of a pluralistic society.This article revisits the constitutional and statutory prohibitions against discrimination, situates them within broader philosophical arguments for equality, and urges the Adamawa State Government to adopt proactive legislative measures to forestall the deepening of sectarian divides.
1. Constitutional Guarantees and the Illegality of Discriminatory Tenancy Practices
a. Section 42 of the 1999 Constitution (as amended)
Section 42 remains the cornerstone of Nigeria’s anti‑discrimination framework. It unequivocally forbids any form of differential treatment based on ethnicity, religion, or place of origin. By denying tenancy on these grounds, landlords effectively impose a private form of segregation that mirrors the very “disabilities or restrictions” the Constitution seeks to abolish.
Housing is not a luxury; it is a prerequisite for human dignity, autonomy, and participation in society. To deny it on discriminatory grounds is to violate both the letter and spirit of Section 42.
b. Sections 15(2) and 15(3)
The Constitution’s directive principles impose a positive obligation on the state to promote national integration and discourage discrimination. These provisions articulate a vision of Nigeria as a civic nation, not a patchwork of mutually suspicious ethnic or religious enclaves.
When landlords exclude tenants based on identity, they undermine this constitutional aspiration and contribute to the fragmentation of the social order.
c. Section 17(3)(a)
This section reinforces the state’s duty to ensure that all citizens have equal opportunities to secure the means of livelihood. Housing is foundational to livelihood—without it, individuals cannot access employment, education, or community life. Discriminatory rental practices therefore violate the constitutional commitment to social justice and equality of opportunity.
2. Statutory and International Legal Reinforcement
a. Nigerian Urban and Regional Planning Act (1992)
Although not explicitly anti‑discriminatory, the Act envisions equitable access to housing and urban services. Discriminatory tenancy practices distort the equitable distribution of housing opportunities and contradict the Act’s developmental philosophy.
b. Violence Against Persons (Prohibition) Act (VAPP Act)
By adopting the VAPP Act, Adamawa State has already recognized that discriminatory or harmful practices constitute a form of violence. Denying housing based on tribe or religion inflicts emotional, psychological, and economic harm—harm that falls squarely within the Act’s protective scope.
c. International Human Rights Instruments
Nigeria’s obligations under the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights and the ICCPR reinforce the constitutional prohibition of discrimination. These instruments affirm that access to housing must be free from arbitrary distinctions based on identity. As domesticated law, the African Charter binds all public and private actors within Nigeria.
3. Philosophical Foundations: Why Discrimination Is Morally Indefensible
Beyond legal prohibitions, discrimination in housing violates fundamental philosophical principles:
a. Human Dignity
Philosophers from Immanuel Kant to contemporary human rights theorists argue that dignity requires treating individuals as ends in themselves, not as bearers of group labels. Rejecting a tenant because of their tribe or religion reduces the person to a stereotype, stripping them of individuality.
b. Justice and Fairness
John Rawls’ theory of justice emphasizes fairness as the basis of social cooperation. A society where access to basic goods—such as housing—is determined by arbitrary characteristics cannot be considered just.
c. Communitarian Ethics
African communitarian philosophy, exemplified by the concept of Ubuntu, stresses interdependence and shared humanity. Discriminatory housing practices fracture communal bonds and contradict the African ethic of collective flourishing.
4. Social and Security Implications for Adamawa State
Adamawa’s diversity has long been a source of strength. However, discriminatory housing practices threaten to:
- Entrench ethnic and religious segregation
- Foster mistrust and resentment
- Create fertile ground for radicalization
- Escalate into sectarian conflict
- Undermine development and state stability
In a region already grappling with security challenges, allowing such divisions to deepen would be perilous.
5. A Legislative Appeal to the Adamawa State Government
To preserve peace and uphold constitutional values, the Adamawa State Government should consider enacting a Comprehensive Anti‑Discrimination in Housing Law. Such legislation could:
- Explicitly prohibit discrimination in tenancy based on tribe, religion, or ethnicity
- Impose sanctions on violators
- Establish a Housing Rights Complaint Commission
- Require landlords to provide objective, written reasons for rejecting applicants
- Promote public enlightenment on tolerance and peaceful coexistence
This would align Adamawa with global best practices and strengthen Nigeria’s commitment to equality and national unity.
---
6. A Call for Tolerance, Peace, and Shared Humanity
Legal reforms alone cannot heal social divides. Community leaders, religious institutions, and civil society must champion tolerance and mutual respect. Peaceful coexistence is not only a constitutional mandate—it is a moral duty and a philosophical necessity for a plural society.
Discrimination in housing is not merely unlawful; it is an affront to the Nigerian spirit of unity in diversity. The Constitution envisions a nation where every citizen—regardless of tribe or religion—can live, work, and flourish anywhere. Upholding this vision is essential for lasting peace and collective progress.
No comments:
Post a Comment