Sharia Court Jurisdiction and Constitutional Limits in Nigeria: A Case Study of Kaduna State

The constitutional jurisdiction of Sharia courts in Nigeria is defined by Section 275 of the 1999 Constitution, which confers subject matter jurisdiction over Islamic personal law matters involving consenting Muslim parties, while federal criminal law supremacy limits Sharia criminal jurisdiction to offences under state Sharia Penal Codes. Kaduna State's bifurcated legal system, combining Sharia courts with Area and Magistrate courts, provides a practical context for examining the boundaries of Sharia court jurisdiction. This study examines the constitutional limits of Sharia court jurisdiction in Kaduna State and evaluates how courts manage jurisdictional conflicts. A doctrinal and empirical methodology is adopted, reviewing the 1999 Constitution, Kaduna State Sharia Court Law, selected jurisdictional challenge decisions, and structured interviews with fifteen judicial officers and practitioners from both Sharia and secular court tracks. The study evaluates the subject matter scope of Sharia jurisdiction, the constitutional provisions on appeals to state High Courts from Sharia decisions, and the management of matters involving Muslim and non-Muslim parties. Existing scholarship identifies conflicting judicial interpretations of Section 275 scope as a source of persistent jurisdictional uncertainty in Kaduna courts. The constitutional text, Section 275-279, and the 2003 Court of Appeal decisions in Sharia jurisdiction cases provide the analytical framework. Findings are expected to reveal continuing uncertainty. Recommendations address legislative clarification of Sharia court subject matter jurisdiction and inter-court coordination protocols. Keywords: Sharia court jurisdiction, constitutional law, Kaduna State, Islamic courts, legal pluralism.