THE ESTABLISHMENT AND ADMINISTRATION OF MAẒĀLIM COURT SYSTEM IN SOKOTO METROPOLIS IN THE 19TH CENTURY

This paper studied the establishment and administration of Maẓālim Court system in Sokoto Caliphate in the 19th century. This was with a view to investigating the efforts and commitment of the founders of the Sokoto Caliphate to the administration of justice which was one of the central arguments of the leaders of the 1804 Sokoto Jihad against the Hausa aristocrats before the 19th century. The case in point – Maẓālim Court was the apex court in the Islamic judicial system, and open establishment of the Caliphate the leadership in justification of their commitment to justice established this court in Sokoto which was the seat of power of the Caliph. Using a qualitative methodology, the paper found that Maẓālim court was established and was operated by the Caliph in Sokoto during the 19th century. In addition, it was however discovered that the court was operated in Sokoto with three mandates: accepting and administering fresh judicial complaints; administering appeals from the lower courts, and operating an Ombudsman mandate. But its operation was not exclusively by the Caliph alone; rather it was operated in some instances by the Wullāt (representatives) of the Caliph as indicated in the text. Thus, this paper concluded that the establishment and administration of the Maẓālim court in Sokoto was a clear indication of the commitment of the founders of the 19th century Sokoto Caliphate to the administration of justice as a justification to their course of rising against the injustices of the former Hausa aristocrats.


Introduction
The Islamic political system rests the responsibility of governing the entire Muslim Umma on the vicegerent of Allah on earth, that is, the Caliph. It is under this system that in an Islamic state, the Caliph holds all powers to administer the Caliphate in all aspects. This is as a result of his temporal authority that combines government power and judicial discretion, within which authority the Caliph equally enjoys the mandate to delegate responsibilities to different personalities for administration on his behalf. However, despite this the Caliph still reserves the right to inspect, guide and review some administrative decisions passed wrongly or inappropriately by his officers as the chief judicial officer of the Caliphate. On this note, decisions that have legal bearings are mostly affected by these reviews, for, the judgements in cases that directly or indirectly infringe into the rights of the Umma arose concern.
In conformity to the ideals of the movement since 1804, the leader of the movement; Shaykh Uthman bn Fūdi appointed Malam Muhammadu Sambo as the Chief Imām and Qāḍī Quḍḍāt -an officer responsible for judicial matters of the community (Last, 1977:45-46;Hiskett, 1960;Boyed and Mark, 1999). This signified the importance attached to the justice system by the leadership of the movement in Hausa land, and in turn with the successes resulting to the establishment of the Caliphate, judicial 320 | Islam Universalia -International Journal of Islamic Studies and Social Sciences. Volume 2 , Number 2, Sept 2020 administration became the hallmark in the affairs in the capital of the Caliphate, Sokoto. Thus, it is evident the judicial power was vested under the care of the Qāḍī al-Quḍḍāt, but its centrality as it formed the essence of the establishment of the Caliphate made it necessary to have some checks and balance for the judiciary to be created and maintained by the Caliph himself in the headquarters. It is in the light of this that Maẓālim institution was established to ensure justice throughout the territorial map of the Caliphate (Gwandu, 2011;Uthman, 2012;Sulaiman, 2012;Chiranchi, 2013). The object of this paper is, therefore, to examine the establishment and administration of Maẓālim court system in Sokoto. Further in the paper it will be expressed that not only did the institution of Maẓālim existed in Sokoto as the capital of the Caliphate, it was also operated differently from the Caliphates of Mamluks and Ottoman, where in both cases a single officer is enjoyed the responsibility of administering Maẓālim court by the Sultan (Fuess, 2009).

Conceptual Clarification
The word Maẓālim represents a plural form of Mazlimat, which denotes act of injustice or wrong doing (Tastan, 2003). In an ordinary sense, the institution is seen as an appeal court, for, different kinds of complaints are forwarded to the court for administration and however, complaints are synonymous to appeal. On the other hand, the institution of Maẓālim is avenues through which the temporal authorities took direct responsibility for dispensing justice and through which complains are forwarded (Fuess, 2009;Nielson, 2012;Tastan, 2003). This demonstrates the open and wider operational jurisdiction of the Maẓālim court, and the powers vested on its adjudicator. This according to Khaldun (1958:392) suggests that 'it (Maẓālim court) is an office that combines the high-handed powers of the Sultan with the nasafa or justice of the judge'. Specifically, the Maẓālim court operates a threefold functions: as a court of first instance where fresh complaints are registered by complainants; as a court of appeal where cases decided by the various Alkalai and Sarakuna are reviewed and as an ombudsman where orders or caution were issued against the injustices of state officials and other criminals (Tillier,2009;42-46). Hence, the working definition here rests on this operational jurisdiction.

The Maẓālim Court in Sokoto Metropolis
Being the capital where the Caliph resided, Maẓālim jurisdiction was exercised by the Caliph as these cases were brought both within the metropolitan region (Sokoto and its districts) and from the distant emirates lying in the eastern flank of the Caliphate (Smith, 1960;Naniya, 2000;Uba, 1979;Madabo, 1991;Abubakar, 2008). However, as early as in the formative years of the Caliphate in 1806, Shaykh Abdullahi bn Fodiyo cautioned the injustices of the jihad forces in attacking the Dhimmis of Kwalde in which the Shaykh himself ordered the release of their captives and the booty derived from that expedition returned (Hiskett, 1956;Ibrahim, 2000;Mafara, 2013). Similarly, Caliph Muhammad Bello (1817Bello ( -1837 322 | Islam Universalia -International Journal of Islamic Studies and Social Sciences. Volume 2 , Number 2, Sept 2020 acknowledged the receipt of complaint against Abdulsalam (d. 1818, who was at Kware) brought to him by Ahl al-Shikayat (some complainants), that Abdulsalam seized their properties to which Caliph Muhammad Bello ordered Abdulsalam to return their properties to them (Bello). As identified earlier, the jurisdiction and operations of the Maẓālim court in Sokoto extended northward and eastward rather than westward. Though scanty, but some records pointed at Maẓālim cases being reported from the northern part of the Caliphate especially Adar was more occupied with their administrative and judicial problems than those of the Metropolitan districts (Adeleye, 1971:48-49;Last, 1977:198-207 (Last, 1977;Gandi, 2011;Buhari, 2013;Ango, 2013). Similarly, Dan Daura was the messenger who usually conveyed messages from Katsina to Sokoto during Emir Abubakar bn Ibrahim (1887-1905. Secondly, are the individuals who do not follow the protocol when appealing against the injustices of an Emir or any of the emir's official. This is as a result of which the complainant fear being blocked or harassed and thus will avoid the protocol and go direct to the Caliph. This 324 | Islam Universalia -International Journal of Islamic Studies and Social Sciences. Volume 2 , Number 2, Sept 2020 is evident from the response of the Emir Abubakar of Katsina (1887-1905 to the Caliph's orders in respect of a complaint registered to the Caliph's court against him. The Letter in Backwell (1978:34) and in (NAK/Katprof, G/ARLO/Vol. I/10) read; From Sarkin Katsina Abubakar Maiyaki, son of Ibrahim to the Sarkin Musulmi Muhammadu Attahiru, greetings, etc. After greetings, I inform you that I am sending to tell you of the arrival of your messenger. I have seen the reply in your letter about the Galadima's complaint. He came from you with your messenger through whom you have ordered me to let him stay in his house and give him back what was taken from him. This was the substance of your reply. This is to tell you that I have not touched his property not even a needle and have restored to him his house willingly and joyfully. So I have written to you. Peace.
In the same Backwell ( also deposed on the grounds of his inability to handle the emirate affairs, but after deposition he did not resist (Smith, 1960:178-188 Gidado bn Laima (with the authority of the Caliph) on age grounds and his son Zubair bn Ishaq was appointed (Gandi, 2011;Mafara, 2013, Last, 1977. It is important however to note that, although these cases were not directly reported to Sokoto as an appeal, but were handled by the Caliph through the Wazīr because of its expediency especially in the case of the later. But one thing to note here is that, even if these cases were not handled  officers that would help him to manage the affairs of the community (Last, 1977:46-57). With the developments in Jihad campaigns especially from 1808 more responsibilities became necessary, for, the increasing territorial expansion leading to the establishment of emirates as political units (Abubakar, 1974).
However, there is no doubt in the fact that this institution existed and was maintained even beyond the demise of the Caliphate, yet it is interesting to suggest that throughout the  (Abdul, 1980;Last, 1977:147;Bako, 2011:69-69). Kofa to some eastern emirates (Paden, 1973:318). In the Caliph's court, the Wazīr was the most senior official among the Caliph's courtiers. He was followed by the Alkalin Alkalai, the Chief Imām and other officials of the state in that order. The Wazīr however, used to be in every sitting of the Maẓālim court except on occasions where he (the Wazīr) was officially assigned other responsibility to discharge by the Caliph either within the metropolis or outside.
As the Kofa to some eastern emirates, Wazīr undertook yearly tours to all emirates under his supervision, as signified in an adage as Shekara tafiyar Waziri (Gandi, 2011). While on yearly tours, the Wazīr had the mandate to administer any administrative or judicial problem he came across on the course  (d. 1910) was there in person as a result of appeal to resolve the succession disputes but the crisis got out of hand and finally led to the famous Kano civil war between 1892 and 1894 (Fika, 1978;Dokaji, 1958;Bello, nd).