Application of Islamic Criminal Law in Sokoto State: Offences, Procedures and Sentencing

Following the re-implementation of Sharia criminal law in Sokoto State in 2000, the state's Sharia courts acquired jurisdiction over a range of criminal offences including Hudud, Qisas (retaliation), and Ta'zir (discretionary) offences. The manner in which these offence categories are prosecuted, adjudicated, and sentenced under Sokoto State's Sharia Penal Code reflects both doctrinal influences and institutional constraints. This study descriptively examines the criminal justice process under Islamic law in Sokoto State. A case study methodology is applied to fifty criminal case files from three Sharia court levels (area, Upper Area, and High Court) spanning 2000 to 2022, complemented by structured interviews with twelve Sharia judges. The study examines classification of offences across the Hudud-Qisas-Ta'zir spectrum, prosecutorial standards, defence rights, sentencing consistency, and the relationship between Sharia penalties and the federal Criminal Code. Available scholarship identifies Ta'zir as the operative penalty category in the vast majority of adjudicated cases given the evidentiary standards required for Hudud, with sentencing disparities across judges noted as a systemic concern. The Maliki school's criminal jurisprudence provides the primary analytical standard. Findings are expected to reveal institutional constraints on consistent criminal sentencing. Recommendations address sentencing guidelines, judicial training, and defence counsel standards in Sokoto State Sharia criminal proceedings. Keywords: Islamic criminal law, sentencing, Sokoto State, Sharia courts, Ta'zir.