‎Farooq Kperogi, divorce allegations, and the Aisha Buhari controversy: The legal danger of reckless commentary, by Alih Ibrahim

In a recent online commentary, Prof. Farooq Kperogi made sweeping allegations about the personal life of Nigeria’s former First Lady, Aisha Buhari, including claims that she was divorced by President Muhammadu Buhari before his death, and had reverted to her maiden name. He went further to insinuate that her presence during Buhari’s illness and death was merely cosmetic, and questioned her moral right to speak on behalf of the late President.

‎These are no light claims. Though couched in casual language and personal tone, Kperogi’s statements touch on sensitive personal status issues, religious norms, and legal rights of representation, and could give rise to actionable liability in Nigerian law. This article outlines the legal implications of such statements when made without evidence under five headings below in seriatim.

‎1. Defamation: Reputation is Protected Even in Death.

‎While defamation typically protects the living, the reputational rights of families, especially spouses, are still recognized in Nigerian law and Islamic jurisprudence. Accusing Aisha Buhari of misrepresenting her relationship with the late President without evidence may amount to defamation by implication (innuendo), and reputational injury to her and the Buhari family.

‎Under Nigerian law, defamation occurs when a person publishes a statement that:

‎is false,
‎is published to a third party, and
‎lowers the reputation of the person in the estimation of right-thinking members of society.
‎By claiming that Aisha and Buhari had divorced (a matter of personal status that is not publicly confirmed) and suggesting that she had no legal or moral standing to speak on his behalf, Kperogi may have crossed the line from fair comment into speculative defamation, especially if the statements turn out to be false.

‎2. Islamic Personal Law and the Burden of Proof

‎In Northern Nigeria, marital relationships involving Muslims are governed by Shari’ah personal status rules, which place the burden of proof (bayyina) on the person alleging divorce. Under Islamic law:

‎A divorce must be clear (sarih) and preferably in writing or witnessed.
‎A woman’s legal status as wife continues until the end of the iddah (waiting) period.

‎Public claims of divorce without evidence are discouraged and sinful (qadhf, or false accusation, in some contexts).
‎Kperogi’s statement that Buhari and Aisha had divorced, and that she had reverted to her maiden name, is a personal status claim, and must be proven by law. If not, it not only violates the dignity of the parties but may amount to public slander under both Islamic law and Nigerian criminal jurisprudence.

‎3. Injurious Falsehood and Malice

‎Kperogi’s article may also attract liability under the tort of injurious falsehood, where:

‎A false statement is published maliciously,
‎It refers to a person’s legal rights or status,
‎And causes or is likely to cause damage to their interests.
‎By alleging that Aisha Buhari was no longer Buhari’s wife, and that she had to be “intensely persuaded” to care for him while sick, the article may be construed as undermining her image, disrupting public perception, and attacking her credibility—particularly in the sensitive aftermath of a national leader’s death.

‎Malice may be inferred from the tone, timing, and lack of substantiation in the statement.

‎4. Misuse of Platform and Academic Irresponsibility

‎As a professor and public intellectual, Farooq Kperogi enjoys academic freedom, but this does not license recklessness or character assassination. Under Nigeria’s cybercrime laws (especially sections relating to online harassment or false information), and civil laws protecting privacy and dignity, platform holders have a duty to verify facts, especially when speaking on sensitive private matters like death, divorce, or legacy.

‎Statements like “they had divorced, and Aisha reverted to her maiden name” must not be made based on “observation” or “rumour,” especially when the persons involved are still alive and no public document confirms the claim.

‎5. Posthumous Rights and Dignity of Leadership

‎In both Nigerian customary culture and Islamic tradition, the death of a leader is a moment for dignity, prayer, and restraint not unverified gossip or salacious speculation. It is arguable that Kperogi’s article violates these sensibilities by politicizing death and undermining familial cohesion. This may not be legally actionable under statute, but it breaches the ethics of responsible public commentary.

‎Conclusion: Commentary Is Not Immunity

‎Freedom of speech is not freedom from consequences. Prof. Kperogi’s statements, if false, are capable of causing reputational damage, psychological harm, and public misunderstanding. If indeed Aisha Buhari remains the widow of the former President, then these statements amount to libelous misrepresentation of her status, capable of supporting both civil and religious remedies.

‎The lesson is clear: public figures must exercise great caution when commenting on the private lives of others, especially on matters as weighty as divorce, illness, and death. No one is above the law—not even columnists with global platforms like Kperogi.

–Rabiidii Ibrahim, Esq. is a Kano-based legal practitioner and advocate for responsible public discourse.