Relevance of Usul al-Fiqh (Principles of Islamic Jurisprudence) in Resolving Contemporary Disputes in Sharia Courts in Niger State

This study examines the relevance of Usul al-Fiqh, the foundational principles of Islamic jurisprudence, in resolving contemporary civil and family disputes in Sharia courts in Niger State, North Central Nigeria. As Sharia courts continue to adjudicate on matters of personal law in many northern Nigerian states, questions about the adequacy of traditional jurisprudential tools in addressing modern legal scenarios have become increasingly pertinent. The study employs a qualitative research design, using document analysis and semi-structured interviews with 15 Sharia court judges and 10 Islamic law lecturers in Minna and Bida. Data were analysed using thematic and content analysis. Findings reveal that while Usul al-Fiqh principles such as Ijma (scholarly consensus), Qiyas (analogical reasoning), and Maslaha (public interest) are routinely referenced in court judgments, their application is often inconsistent, and several judges report limited formal training in advanced jurisprudential methodology. The study recommends mandatory continuing legal education for Sharia court judges, the development of context-specific jurisprudential case studies, and stronger linkages between university Islamic law departments and the state judiciary. These findings are relevant to legal reform advocates, Islamic law scholars, and state governments responsible for Sharia court administration. Keywords: Usul al-Fiqh, Islamic jurisprudence, Sharia courts, Niger State, dispute resolution.