Citation: Adeleke, A.O., Benjamin, K.T. & Egejuru, E.C. (2026). A Clash of Titans: The Nigerian Gender Culture Versus CEDAW. Tasambo Journal of Language, Literature, and Culture, 5(2), 103-114. www.doi.org/10.36349/tjllc.2026.v05i02.012.
A CLASH OF TITANS: THE NIGERIAN GENDER
CULTURE VERSUS CEDAW
By
Anthonia Oluwatoyin Adeleke
Department of History and International
Studies
Redeemer’s University, Ede.
07049555646
And
Kehinde Tola Benjamin
Department of History and International
Studies
Redeemer’s University, Ede.
And
Emmanuella Chidimma Egejuru
Department of History and International
Studies
Redeemer’s University, Ede.
Abstract
The Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women serves
as a legal framework saddled with the responsibility of addressing issues
related to all forms of gender inequality and gender-based violence. However,
in recent times, there have been debates and arguments raised by scholars
concerning its adaptability in different societies, especially the Nigerian
context, considering the challenges posed by the diverse cultures that
characterise the nation. The paper evaluates CEDAW within the Nigerian context
by drawing on existing literature and scholarship. It is established that
internal factors, such as the gendered nature of the Nigerian constitution, and
external factors, such as the misinterpretation of local practices and culture
by international advocacy bodies, have hampered the smooth implementation of
CEDAW in Nigeria. Using historical methodology, which involves the use of a
thematic approach and textual analysis, the study finds that contextual
analysis and an in-depth understanding of the dynamics that characterise
various societies are essential to the implementation of CEDAW at local levels
in Nigeria.
Keywords: Women, Gender Equality, Gender discrimination, Women’s rights,
Patriarchy
Introduction
The Convention on the
Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) is an
international convention that has gained global recognition as a legal
framework dedicated to the eradication of discrimination against women. Its
inception can be traced back to the United Nations General Assembly in 1979
(UNGA, 1979). The evolution and worldwide implementation of CEDAW have sparked
a myriad of perspectives and debates, scrutinising both its victories and
shortcomings. Its principles and development have been shaped by a diverse
range of stakeholders, including scholars, activists, and state actors (UNGA,
1979).
Many researchers have
conducted research on CEDAW, and they admit that this is a significant
international legal document, which promotes the rights of women (Zwingel,
2005). Hellum and Aasen (2013), in particular, put CEDAW into a global
framework as a legal tool. There are numerous international, regional, and
national commitments that states make in such a system to respect, protect and
deliver civil, political and social rights of women. In the introduction to the
book, there is a historical imbalance in the legal status of men and women. This
was a radical change in this century, which saw the establishment and the
embrace of so many human rights agreements and conventions. Among them, CEDAW
became the major legal basis of women's rights.
The author makes a
very interesting point that the establishment of CEDAW came about through the
gender-neutral symmetrical strategy towards dealing with sex discrimination
within other international treaties (Halme-Tuomisaari, 2020). CEDAW is one of
the pillars of universal human rights and women's rights. It is used to
represent the joint actions of the stakeholders in promoting the empowerment
and growth of women. The unwavering feminist struggle to achieve goals in the
field of gender equality, supported by policymakers and diplomats all over the
world over the years, resulted in the establishment of CEDAW (Halme-Tuomisaari,
2020).
The analysis of the
historical course of CEDAW and the discussion of the implementation of women's
rights in the world can help to gain valuable information. It causes an
assessment of the application of CEDAW in particular circumstances in Nigeria.
It also emphasises the contextual insight that should be used to evaluate the
effectiveness and the impact of such an influential legal structure. While
various literature exists on CEDAW and its implementation in the global north,
there exists a gap in the discourse about the implementation and challenges of
CEDAW within the Nigerian society. This paper seeks to explore the various
factors that have influenced the success and failure of CEDAW’s implementation
in Nigeria.
Literature Review
This paper explores various literatures to address key themes in the
study, including the making of CEDAW and the CEDAW argument on a global scale.
The Making of CEDAW
The Commission on the
Status of Women marked its 25th anniversary with the theme “Year of
the Woman” (Pietila, 2007). This request was tendered to the United Nations
General Assembly. This celebration aimed to remind the world of the
discrimination against women deeply entrenched in various laws and cultural
practices at the time. It was to be an opportunity to create awareness and
foster collaboration on the emancipation and empowerment of women (Pietila,
2007). The UNGA endorsed the recommendation made by the Commission on the
International Women's Year, and the International Women's Year had three major
themes (UNGA, 1972). The first was centred on the promotion of equality and
fairness in all sectors for women. The second involved the empowerment and
development of women of all societies, and the third included the recognition
of the increasing contribution of women to peacebuilding and maintenance
processes (UNGA, 1975). The first World Women's Conference, known as the World
Conference of the International Women’s Year, was held in Mexico from 19th
June to 2nd July 1975. It was observed to remind the international
community that discrimination against women was a prevalent abnormality that
must be tackled. It marked the beginning of a series of conferences that
brought about ground-breaking feats concerning women's affairs spearheaded by
the United Nations. A total of one hundred and thirty-three governments participated
in the conference (UNWOMEN, 2024). The Non-Governmental Organizations had a
total number of six thousand representatives present at the conference's
parallel forum, the International Women's Year Tribune, which was held
simultaneously. This conference formed the bedrock for various plans of action,
conventions, and agreements that were implemented and determined the course of
the United Nations' activities regarding women's affairs up until 1985
(Boutros-Ghali, 1996).
In this decade, women
witnessed the birth of new organisations and legal frameworks. By the end of
the decade, the Commission for the Status of Women was not the only entity
working on women's affairs in the United Nations (UNGA, 1977). This decade
witnessed the creation of two critical bodies that birthed the UN Women: the
creation of the Willing Fund for the Decade of Women of the United Nations in
1976 and the Convention for the Elimination of Discrimination against Women,
adopted in 1979 (Hannan, 2019). The Convention on the Elimination of All Forms
of Discrimination against Women was passed by the UNGA in 1979 due to the plan
of action adopted at the Summit in Mexico to give legal structure to the
Willing Funds for UN Women created in 1976 (Hannan, 2019). In 1976, a working
group inside the Commission on the Status of Women drafted the convention's
language. Various considerations and changes were performed between 1977 and
1979. The Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against
Women was established on September 3rd as an International Charter
for the Rights of Women, serving as the legal framework for the first UNIFEM
and later the UN Women (United Nations, 2024).
Ngaba (1995) argues
that the various articles contained in the CEDAW can be grouped into six major
parts, with thirty articles in total. Various issues regarding sexual assaults
and harassment, such as sex stereotypes, sex trafficking and discrimination,
are addressed in articles one to six (OHCHR, 2024). The public realms, with a
focus on representation and political participation and the right to vote,
characterise Articles seven to nine. Specific safeguards for women in rural
communities and women’s social and economic rights are the central themes of
articles ten to fourteen (OHCHR, 2024). Marriage and family issues, such as
rights to various marital decisions, are addressed in articles fifteen and
sixteen. Articles seventeen to twenty-two are administrative, addressing the
establishment of the CEDAW committee and procedures for the reporting of state
parties. Articles twenty-three to thirty encapsulate the achievements and
impact of CEDAW on existing treaties, state actors' commitment and the
administrative sphere of the Convention (OHCHR, 1979).
An agreement to CEDAW
that allows signatories to recognise the ability of the convention to
accommodate individual complaints, also known as the Optional Protocol to CEDAW,
was effected in December 2000 after its adoption by the UNGA in 1999. There are
currently eighty signatories and one hundred and fourteen parties. Nigeria is a
signatory and ratified the protocol in 2000 (OHCHR 2024; OHCHR 1995).
The CEDAW Argument on the Global Scale
CEDAW has faced
various controversies and undergone criticism and scrutiny. Most of the
controversy stems from various perspectives. From Christina’s perspective,
rooted in social and religious sceptics, CEDAW seeks to enforce progressive and
anarchical standards on states, threatening their indigenous values (Sommers,
2010). Radical scholars like Susanne Zwingel, however, are sceptical of CEDAW’s
ability to transform societies positively based on the argument that most
policymakers and implementers are individuals alien to the communities they aim
to transform (Zwingel, 2018). They emphasise the irony of the attempt to change
a system one cannot connect with based on policies made by people who do not understand
the system. They attribute the failure of various instruments of change to this
factor, and CEDAW is no exception (Zwingel, 2018).
The general arguments
on CEDAW are divided into three main themes: the CEDAW transformative approach,
which links sociocultural elements, social support, and equal rights; the CEDAW
holistic approach, which links civil, political, social, and economic rights;
and the CEDAW gender-specific approach to equality and non-discrimination
(Shivdas & Coleman, 2010). The importance of CEDAW is highlighted as a
gender-specific document that recognises the limitations of existing human
rights frameworks and the inseparable nature of all human rights(Shivdas &
Coleman, 2010). Optimists and
constructivist feminist legal experts view CEDAW as the equality and
non-discrimination regime with the most significant potential to create
meaningful gender equality for women because it applies to both the private and
public spheres (Shivdas & Coleman, 2010).
While highlighting
the CEDAW's silence on gender-based poverty in its preamble and the absence of
acknowledgement or provision for such poverty within all other UN human rights
treaties, the relationship between gender and poverty is established right away
in Campbell's book. This is how she conceptualises gender-based poverty. She
argues that because of their economic fragility, women in poverty endure a
network of human rights violations that feed on one another. The monograph
presents clear and convincing arguments for gender-based violence to be
classified as a matter of human rights concerns. It is further maintained that
although CEDAW does not specifically mention poverty, its two main objectives
of equality and non-discrimination indicate that gender-based poverty falls
squarely within its purview (Campbell, 2018).
Legal arguments that
are clear and compelling are presented to expand and clarify the CEDAW's
purview. As a result, the focus of this work is not a critical critique of
CEDAW but rather on how the convention may change through time by leveraging
the rules of equality and non-discrimination to advance its goals (Campbell,
2018). Through a thorough analysis of the convention, Rebecca explores the
accomplishments of CEDAW and the contributions it can make to combat the
various forms of marginalisation women encounter around the world. The idea of
norm translation is introduced in the first chapter as a framework for the
empirical investigation. The two central tenets of international norms that are
presupposed by norm translation are those that are geared towards international
institutions and those that are geared towards local institutions and
discourses where a variety of actors interact with them by endorsing, changing,
or rejecting them (Cook, 1993).
Veronica Federico
describes the context of the more considerable global discussion on gender
equitability, which led to the creation of CEDAW, identifying three phases of
global awareness: the rise of global awareness from 1945 to 1975, the challenge
to gender hierarchies through the establishment of intergovernmental
institutions and transnational movements from 1975 to 1995, and the
consolidation of gender equitability accompanied by enduring and fresh
manifestations of gender inequality from 1995 to the present (Federico, 2023).
Anne Bayefsky’s work focuses on how CEDAW evolved from a treaty that nations
have symbolically ratified into a reliable global monitoring system for women's
rights with a focus on state parties' actions (Bayefsky, 2000). She uses
several statistics to convey a thorough analysis of state parties' actions. He
examines state parties' attitudes regarding CEDAW in general from 1981 to 2014,
by global region, as well as their attitudes about CEDAW resistance by world
area (Zwingel, 2016). Concerns have been raised about the legal issues that
pose a challenge to the plausible implementation of CEDAW. For Rebecca Cook and
Anne Bayefsky, there is a need for state constitutions and legal institutions
to align with the principles of CEDAW. Cook insists on the alignment between
national legislation and CEDAW’s provisions. Within her argument, she
highlights the role of legal bodies in the advocacy of women’s rights and the
prosecution of discrimination against women. In her opinion, the implementation
of CEDAW is impossible without the backing of states' judicial support.
Unfortunately, this is often lacking, making the framework a house of cards
incapable of having any real or lasting effect in ensuring the protection of
women’s rights and equality (Cook, 2012).
For Amartya Sen, the
bone of contention is the attempt to implement and understand CEDAW without
evaluating the root of gender inequality (Sen, 1999). Economic factors, such as
the need to set out adequate finances for health care and education, must be brought
to the fore. He emphasises, like Kabeer, the need for targeted interventions
and capacity-building programs to support marginalised women and communities,
particularly in low-income and conflict-affected settings (Kabeer, 2005).
Kimberly Crenshaw
emphasises the existence of women as members of their society and not
individuals that exist in the abstract (Crenshaw, 1989). Therefore, she also
adopts the intersectional approach. She highlights the need to tackle the
problems faced by marginalised identities, as women are likely to be the
majority in those groups. She says vices and challenges that stain the fabric
of society, such as racism, poverty, and sexual harassment, must be looked
into. By doing this, a better understanding of the diversity of women’s
experiences and their unique identities can be better addressed through
holistic mediums in intersecting the discrimination they face (Crenshaw, 1989).
Theoretical Framework
This study adopts
Eade and Cornwall’s social-cultural theory on the implementation of CEDAW. Eade
and Cornwall (2007) take a socio-cultural approach to the implementation of
CEDAW. Their argument revolves around social constructs and power dynamics. For
them, conservative societies would have little to no progress regarding the
implementation of CEDAW. Backing this line of argument, Hossain brings forward
the influence of religious principles and ideologies as actors in the
opposition of women’s rights initiatives, including CEDAW. Conservative
political sects sponsor stereotypes that strengthen the inculcation of
patriarchal norms into society. With these discriminatory tenets being
entrenched in society, there is little or no chance for the successful
implementation of CEDAW. He, therefore, views CEDAW as an idealist dream that
must challenge real social and cultural issues to have any impact on women’s
discrimination, which is the reason for its creation in the first place (Peters
& Wolper, 1995).
Methodology
This research adopts a thematic and historical method of
analysis. The study relies on a comprehensive collection of both primary and
secondary sources. The primary sources utilised in this research include UN
Women publications, government documents, and oral interviews. Oral interviews
of key UN Women officials were critical, as they allowed the researcher to
capture firsthand accounts and personal recollections that augmented and
corroborated the official records. Six UN Women Nigeria officials, including
the UN Women country representative and programme officers, were interviewed
using a semi-structured format featuring open-ended questions based on their
influence as major stakeholders in the implementation of CEDAW in Nigeria.
Secondary sources, including books and journal articles, were extensively used
to contextualise the primary data and provide a broader scholarly perspective.
These sources helped to situate the findings within the existing historiography
of Nigeria and the broader context of Nigeria’s gender norms and cultures.
The CEDAW Argument in Nigeria
Since the
ratification of CEDAW by Nigeria in 1985, various arguments have surrounded its
implementation in Nigeria.
Legal Political
Blockage
Taking a legal
approach, Amina Mama and Olabisi Akinkugbe have highlighted the judicial
barriers to the implementation of CEDAW in Nigeria. Emphasis has been laid but
not narrowed to the biased nature of the Nigerian constitution (Mama, 1996). It
is argued that women in Nigeria are not adequately protected by the law, as
certain parts of the constitution subtly or outright promote discrimination and
violation of their rights. The first challenge to this is the vague and limited
coverage of the Constitution on matters concerning women’s rights (Ayodeji
&Ade-Ibijola, 2022). For example, Section 6 of the criminal code defines
rape as unlawful carnal knowledge; therefore, the constitution does not
recognise sexual violence between married people as rape. The Evidence Act
section 211 of the Nigerian constitution requires that a woman present evidence
on any claim of rape. Also, if she is considered a wayward person, she is in
danger of her testimony being considered a contradiction. Also, the division of
the criminal codes in Nigeria is proof of the discriminatory nature of the Nigerian
constitution (Interview with UNWomen official).
The vague clauses and
subtle, outright discriminatory phrases in the Nigerian constitution pose a
challenge to the implementation of ratified international legal frameworks
(Interview with UNWomen official). The bills on gender discrimination passed by
the United Nations in partnership with the Ministry for Women's Affairs have
been rejected three times because they contradict specific laws and tenets
upheld by the Nigerian legal system. CEDAW was ratified in 1985 by Nigeria to
foster the protection of women’s rights and the eradication of violence against
women based on their gender. Stating that violence against women is a critical
issue that must be addressed in every society, the convention seeks its
elimination and the empowerment of women to become active and productive
members of society (OHCHR, 2024). Unfortunately, although accepted and ratified
by the Nigerian government, its full implementation has not been achieved to
date, and a significant factor for this is the gendered nature of the Nigerian
constitution. The Labour Act discriminates against women by restricting the
jobs they can do based on their marital status and age (Constitution of the
Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999). Women do not enjoy certain privileges given
to men. The Nigerian constitution continues to embody some of the laws imbibed
by the colonial rulers concerning what is acceptable in the labour force. The
constitution states in section 12 that ratified treaties cannot be implemented
without the national assembly providing a corresponding law. Thus, attempts
have been made in 2007, 2010 and 2021 to pass CEDAW bills, but they were
rejected after going through the general assembly and facing great structural
and normative opposition. The Nigerian constitution also contradicts itself.
While Section 42 opposes the discrimination of any Nigerian citizen based on
sex, the Labour Act discriminates based on sex. Nigeria’s tripartite legal
system, which consists of common, customary and Islamic law, is flawed with
inconsistencies and contradictions that make it difficult to use as an
instrument for protecting the rights of citizens, especially women (Federal
Republic of Nigeria, 1999).
Cultural- Normative Resistance
For Oyeronke Oyewumi,
socio-cultural factors play a considerable role in fostering resistance to the
implementation of CEDAW. They emphasise how traditional gender roles and
patriarchal norms shape the reception achieved by CEDAW in Nigeria (Oyewumi,
1997). Colonialism and imperialism brought drastic changes to the cultural and
religious sphere of Nigeria. The major religions in contemporary Nigeria
(Christianity and Islam) advocate the principle of submission, which extremists
use as a tool to subjugate and violate the rights of women. The complementary
nature of Nigerian society gave way to patriarchy during the colonial era (Ayodeji
& Ade-Ibijola, 2022). Like other legacies of colonialism, this factor,
among others, poses a challenge to the empowerment and emancipation of violated
women in Nigeria (Guarnieri & Rainer, 2021). Due to customary laws, bills
that are perceived as opposing the Islamic regulations binding the codes of
conduct in Muslim northern Nigeria are outrightly rejected. Similar practices
in the south and Eastern parts of Nigeria exist in certain areas of women's
empowerment, such as land ownership and reproductive rights (Guarnieri &
Rainer, 2021).
A good example is the
negation of the Gender and Equal
Opportunities Bill, 2018 (SB 301) in the 8th Senate, which was influenced by
the UN Women and sponsored by Sen. Biodun Olujimi of PDP, Ekiti state
(Agbalajobi & Oluwalogbon, 2019). It
aimed to implement specific clauses from the African Charter on the Rights of
Women in Africa and the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of
Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) protocol. It addressed discrimination in
employment, education, access to healthcare, political and public life, as well
as discrimination based on society and cultural standards (Iroanusi, 2021). The
Bill was well-liked by women and women's organisations but not by the majority
of lawmakers, conventional institutions, or religious organisations, which
contributed to its demise. Some of the sections of the bill were said to
conflict with Nigeria's traditional and religious customs, including customary
law and the Sharia law, which the Nigerian Constitution recognises.
Furthermore, the bill's provisions were seen as redundant and in conflict with
some Constitutional clauses. The Senate negated the bill on a second reading on
March 15, 2016, which prompted the sponsor to make changes to the legislation
(Interview with UNWomen Nigeria official, 2023).
Focusing on the
uneven implementation of CEDAW in various states across Nigeria, Adebayo
Olukoshi and Jibrin Ibrahim emphasise the role of the government in the
implementation of CEDAW. They examine the low commitment and accountability of
the Nigerian government towards the implementation of CEDAW and its protocols.
The debate surrounding CEDAW and its implementation remains a multifaceted
argument that reflects the dynamic nature of the socio-political complexities
that characterise the country (O'Rourke & Swaine, 2018).
Resource Constraints
In line with scholars
who support the intersectional approach, Ifeoma and Donli highlight resource
constraints and capacity as challenges that hamper the implementation of CEDAW
in Nigeria. They claim that the provision of proper infrastructure and a better
standard of living would aid the implementation of CEDAW. In addition to this,
Amina Mama and Zine Magubane emphasise the recognition of the marginalised
minority as gender discrimination is an outcome of other socio-economic
challenges such as poverty, tribalism and disabilities (De LaRey et al.1997).
CEDAW as a Hindrance to the
Implementation of CEDAW in Nigeria
This paper seeks to
shed more light on aspects of CEDAW’s poor implementation that are often
overlooked. One can argue that the biggest challenge to the implementation of
CEDAW in Nigeria is CEDAW itself. What is CEDAW? Who was it made for? What is
discrimination in the Nigerian context? Where does the boundary lie? Who are
the major stakeholders? Article one of CEDAW conceptualises the term
discrimination as “any distinction, exclusion or
restriction made based on sex which has the effect or purpose of impairing or
nullifying the recognition, enjoyment or exercise by women, irrespective of
their marital status, based on equality of men and women, of human rights and
fundamental freedoms in the political, economic, social, cultural, civil or any
other field." (O'Rourke & Swaine, 2018).
Epistemological Clash
This brings to the
fore the faulty generalisation of Nigeria’s cultures and traditions, as well as
the objection that comes with it. It raises questions such as what makes male
circumcision less barbaric than female circumcision. The irony of the advocacy
of gender equality by a convention that instils discrimination by using the
term Gender to represent women for a country that legally recognises two
genders, namely male and female, becomes a point of contention, as this can be
considered a threat to the rights of male members of society. The redundant
nature of CEDAW due to its faulty generalisation of societies must not be
overlooked. If the reason for the creation of CEDAW is the failure of human
rights conventions to protect the rights of women, isn’t the solution ensuring
human rights are protected? How does the creation of CEDAW solve this problem?
If the reasons given for the creation of CEDAW are valid, should we not create
CEDAM (Convention for the Elimination of Discrimination against Men)?
In this discourse on
female protection, all actors apart from the Nigerian female herself are often
evaluated. CEDAW in itself is an instrument of discrimination as it paints
women as damsels in distress, incapable of thinking or making decisions for
themselves. This stereotypical standpoint does not often sit well with the
Nigerian woman (Alvarez & Bauder, 2024). This raises the question: Does the
Nigerian woman want the implementation of CEDAW? Does she consider it
necessary, essential or helpful to her existence? Does she consider it worth
fighting for, or is it another body of regulation considered necessary by
aliens for her sake, based on Eurocentric assumptions of what her needs are?
Who defines discrimination? Does the religious Nigerian woman feel
discriminated, or is it international conventions and bodies that insist that
she is? (Petersen, 2020). How do we quantify discrimination and
marginalisation? What are the boundaries that characterise the use of these
terminologies in the Nigerian context? These contextual issues pose a problem
in themselves. For example, is prostitution in Edo state a matter of
exploitation or a choice? (Enoch, 2020). Do the women involved need
emancipation, or do they consider it a norm? When Article 7 clamours for
equality in governance for women led to the criticisms of Nigerian society
concerning its failure to meet the standards put in place to measure political
participation. Was the word politics considered within the context of Nigerian
women’s opinion? Of all 17 indicators on political participation placed by the
UN Women, only one indicated that political participation at the local level
was on track (Wolbrecht, 2010). Doesn’t that point to the fact that political
participation in Nigerian women differs from political participation as
proposed by CEDAW? What if the Nigerian woman exercises apathy towards
governance, not because she is marginalised, but because she does not agree
with the form of government imposed on her during colonialism that has remained
to date? The apathy towards governance is a problem among women, or does
Nigerian society frown on modern governance practices? Wouldn’t it be a waste
of resources for CEDAW to insist the problem is marginalisation, while it is a
contemporary form of protest by the Nigerian woman? Is gender inequality a
problem in Nigeria? In a bid to clamour for women’s interests, international
organisations and advocates for CEDAW often portray women as damsels in
distress and men as perpetrators of the crime. Where does this place female
perpetrators and male victims? (Chesney-Lind, 1986). Also, where do these place
supportive men?
One can argue that
Nigeria has not implemented CEDAW in Nigeria when viewing the situation through
the lens of pro-Western feminist scholars and international organisational
agencies like the United Nations and the World Bank. However, there is a gap in
Nigeria’s understanding of CEDAW and its implementation within Nigeria’s
society and culture. Nigeria is not a homogeneous society, and this complicates
the adoption of conventions and laws. For example, the understanding of Gender
equality and women’s rights differs from one culture to another. Therefore, it
would be erroneous to measure the CEDAW implementation indicators from a
stereotypical standpoint. For example, apart from discrimination, mass female
illiteracy could be the product of other factors such as a higher female
population, general poverty of the populace or differing priorities. A proper
estimation of the government’s role and capacity for the implementation of the
tenets enshrined in CEDAW is essential. Certain challenges stem from the local
level and cannot be overhauled by the government due to respect for cultural
dynamics and other factors, such as the perspective of the Nigerian female
(Olukoju, 2001).
Indigenous cultures
and practices are often fought against as the sources of women’s rights abuse
without a proper understanding of the historical trajectory of Nigerian society
and its gender space (Offiong et al, 2022). The faulty interpretations of
cultures and traditions rear their ugly head in the debate on CEDAW
implementation in Nigeria. For example, various sharia practices in Nigeria are
considered violations of women’s rights. The question, however, is, do Islamic
women consider themselves violated? A popular debate among Western feminists is
the ability of women to choose what they want as a sign of freedom and
enjoyment of their human rights. The problem with this is the myopic sentiments
that string along with this upon closer examination. Why does this assumption
not hold when an Islamic woman says that she chose to wear the hijab? Why is
that decision considered an outcome of her being brainwashed by the men in her
religion? Doesn’t that discriminate against her by painting her as an
individual incapable of thinking? Or is it true that the ability of women to
choose what they wear is a sign of freedom when it complies with Western
feminists’ standards? If this is true, is that not discrimination? If all is
discrimination, what then is discrimination? In my opinion, to be discriminated
against, one must feel discriminated. One cannot be discriminated against
without one's knowledge of it. There is a thin line between the advocacy
against the discrimination of women and the advocacy against women themselves.
Another issue is the
attempt to implement the Convention through bodies, such as the UN Women, that
are quick to highlight the brutal nature of the cultures and traditions of
Nigerian society (Nwankwo, 2024). This approach has been met with backlash from
people who see the implementation of this convention as a threat and not an
aid. The first step for implementing CEDAW should not be making Nigerians
understand CEDAW but rather making CEDAW suit the Nigerian environment by
ensuring proper understanding of Nigeria among the stakeholders advocating for
its implementation in the country (Okome, 2024). By creating policies that
contradict the indigenous African society and emphasise colonial legacy
strongholds, implementation becomes nearly impossible and, when possible, is
harmful (Austin, 2010).
A significant
challenge for the implementation of gender-related legislation and policies is
their Western framework and lack of enforcement power. It must be brought to
the fore that CEDAW is not the only women’s rights framework that has faced drawbacks
as concerns its implementation (Ausi et al.,2023). Scholars have argued that
these rejected policies and conventions do not reflect the realities of Nigerians.
A good example is the negation of the Gender
and Equal Opportunities Bill, 2018 (SB 301) in the 8th Senate, which was
influenced by the UN Women and sponsored by Sen. Biodun Olujimi of PDP, Ekiti
state. It also sought to adopt certain Africa Charter on the Rights of Women in
Africa and the Convention against Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination
against Women (CEDAW) protocol. It covered discriminating against employees,
education, healthcare services, political and the general life and
discriminating against society and cultural norms (Makinde et al.,2017). Though
the Bill was popular among the UN Women, most of the lawmakers, traditional
institutions, religious organisations, and even the masses, which contributed to
its demise. The parts of the bill were reported to be incompatible with the
traditional and religious practices of Nigeria, such as customary law and the
Sharia law, which Nigeria Constitution is aware of. In addition, the provisions
in the bill were considered unnecessary. These issues with these bills are
similar to those experienced by CEDAW, and the necessity to uphold the values
of the Nigerian society as perceived by Nigerians and not according to the
elevated status of a Western construct (Ijeoma, 2006).
Conclusion
Conclusively, the
Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women
(CEDAW) has come to be recognised as a key tool in the eradication of gender
discrimination in the world. Its beginning in the United Nations General Assembly
in the year 1979 was a very important step towards achieving gender equality.
There have been numerous debates and analyses concerning the evolution of CEDAW,
and some stakeholders have helped in its development and influenced its
principles. CEDAW, being a pillar of universal human rights and women's rights,
is a reflection of the overall contributions of different stakeholders in the
empowerment and development of women. The paper has examined the historical
trend of CEDAW and the discourse that is on the rise in the world. The research
also estimates its application in the Nigerian environment. This analysis
highlights the difference in the contextual sense in gauging the success and
effects of such an important legal structure. CEDAW, in a nutshell, is a concerted
effort towards a gender-free world. Its achievements and failures,
nevertheless, can teach important lessons to plans of action in the sphere of
human rights and the equality of the sexes making this research a stepping
stone to further research by scholars and better implementation of CEDAW in
Nigeria by policy makers and other major stakeholders.
References
Akhami, M., Mahnaz/Ertürk Akhami (Yakı), & Mayer, A. E.
(2018). Feminist advocacy, family law and violence against women.
Routledge.
Alvarez, J. E., & Bauder, J. (2024). Women's
Property Rights Under CEDAW. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780197751879.003.0003
Austin, G. (2010). African economic development and colonial
legacies (No. 1, pp. 11-32). Institut de hautes études internationales et du
développement. https://doi.org/10.4000/poldev.78
Awusi, M., Addae, D., & Kwapong, O. A. T. F. (2023).
Tackling the legislative underrepresentation of women in Ghana: empowerment
strategies for broader gender parity. Social Sciences & Humanities
Open, 8(1), 100717.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssaho.2023.100717
Bayefsky, A. F. (2000, January). The CEDAW Convention: its
contribution today. In Proceedings of the ASIL Annual Meeting (Vol.
94, pp. 197-200). Cambridge University Presshttps://doi.org/10.1017/S027250370005566X
Ayodeji, B. L., & Ade-Ibijola, A. O. (2022). The United
Nations Women and Gender Equality in Nigeria: Challenges and Prospects. African
Journal of Stability and Development (AJSD), 14(1&2),
137-168.
Boutros-Ghali, B. (1996). The United
Nations and the advancement of women, 1945-1996 (UN Department of
Public Information, Ed.). United Nations. https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/214867?ln=en&v=pdf
Campbell, M. (2018). Women, poverty, equality: the role of
CEDAW. Bloomsbury Publishing.
Chesney-Lind, M. (1986). "Women and Crime": The
female offender. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 12(1), 78-96.
Constitution of the Federal Republic of
Nigeria. (1999). http://www.nigeria-law.org/ConstitutionOfTheFederalRepublicOfNigeria.htm
Cook, R. J. (1993). Women's international human rights law:
the way forward. Hum. Rts. Q., 15, 230.
Cook, R. J. (Ed.). (2012). Human rights of women:
National and international perspectives. University of Pennsylvania Press. https://philpapers.org/rec/COOHRO
Eade, D., & Cornwall, A. (2007). Buzzwords and fuzzwords:
deconstructing development discourse.
Crenshaw, K. (2013). Demarginalizing the intersection of
race and sex: A black feminist critique of antidiscrimination doctrine,
feminist theory and antiracist politics. In Feminist legal theories (pp.
23-51). Routledge.https://scholarship.law.columbia.edu/faculty_scholarship/3007
de la Rey, C., Mama, A., &
Magubane, Z. (1997). Beyond the masks. Agenda:
Empowering Women for Gender Equity, 32, 17–23. https://doi.org/10.2307/4066148
Enoch, S. O. (2020). Sex Work in Nigeria: Regulation, not criminalisation. Unilag
Law Review, 4(1), 203-220.https://unilaglawreview.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/SEX-WORK-IN-NIGERIA-REGULATION-NOT-CRIMINALIZATION.pdf
Federico, V. (2023). Legal frameworks. In Migrants and
Refugees in Europe. Work Integration in Comparative Perspective (pp. 38-54).
Policy Press.https://doi.org/10.51952/9781447364535.ch003
Guarnieri, E., &
Rainer, H. (2021). Colonialism and female empowerment: A
two-sided legacy. Journal of Development Economics, 151, 102666. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdeveco.2021.102666
Halme-Tuomisaari, M. (2020). International Humanitarian Law.
In Humanitarianism: Keywords (pp. 120-122). Brill.
Hannan, C., Iiyambo, A., &
Brautigam, C. (2019). A short history of the Commission on
the Status of Women. UN Women. https://www.unwomen.org/sites/default/files/Headquarters/Attachments/Sections/Library/Publications/2019/A-short-history-of-the-CSW-en.pdf
Hellum, A., &
Aasen, H. S. (Eds.). (2013). Women’s human rights:
CEDAW in international, regional and national law.Cambridge University
Press.
Iroanusi, Q. (2021, December
15). Again, gender equality bill suffers a setback at Senate. Premium
Times.https://www.premiumtimesng.com/news/headlines/500980-again-gender-equality-bill-suffers-setback-at-senate.html
Kabeer, N. (2005). Inclusive citizenship:
Meanings and expressions (Vol. 1). Zed Books.https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000200430
Makinde, O., Onyemelukwe, C., Williams, A., Oyediran, K., &
Odimegwu, C. (2017). Rejection of the Gender and Equal
Opportunities Bill in Nigeria: A setback for Sustainable Development Goal
Five. Gender in Management: An International Journal, 32(3), 234-246. https://doi.org/10.1108/GM-02-2017-0023
Mama, A. (1996). The hidden struggle:
Statutory and voluntary sector responses to violence against Black women in the
home. Whiting and Birch.
Ngaba, S. (1995). CEDAW: Eliminating
discrimination against women. Agenda: Empowering Women for Gender
Equity, 27, 81–89. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/10130950.1995.9675479
Ijeoma, A. N. (2006). The Convention on the Elimination of
All Forms of Discrimination against Women and the status of implementation of the
right to health care in Nigeria. Human rights brief, 13(3),
10.
Nwankwo, O. (2016). Identifying Nigeria's
commitment to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination
Against Women (CEDAW). Fourth Dimension Publishing
Co., Ltd. https://cirddoc.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/CEDAW-Identifying-Nigerias-Commitment-PLANNED.pdf
Office of the High Commissioner for Human
Rights. (1995). Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of
Discrimination against Women (Fact Sheet No. 22). United Nations.
Office of the High Commissioner for Human
Rights. (n.d.). Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of
Discrimination against Women. https://www.ohchr.org/en/instruments-mechanisms/instruments/convention-elimination-all-forms-discrimination-against-women
Office of the High Commissioner for Human
Rights. (n.d.). Optional Protocol to the Convention on the
Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women. https://www.ohchr.org/en/instruments-mechanisms/instruments/optional-protocol-convention-elimination-all-forms
Offiong, E. E., Eyo, E. I., & Offiong, A. E. (2021).
Patriarchy, culture and the social development of women in Nigeria. Pinisi
Journal of Art, Humanity and Social Studies, 1(4), 78-86.https://ojs.unm.ac.id/PJAHSS/article/viewFile/26708/13541
Okome, M. O. (2002). Domestic, regional, and
international protection of Nigerian women against discrimination: Constraints
and possibilities. African Studies Quarterly, 6(3). https://asq.africa.ufl.edu/okome_fall02/
Olukoju, A. (2001). NIGERIA–A HISTORY The History of Nigeria.
By TOYIN FALOLA.(The Greenwood Histories of the Modern Nations Series). London
and Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1999. Pp. xviii+ 269.£ 27.95 (ISBN
0-313-30682-6). The Journal of African History, 42(2),
307-352. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0021853701247896
Agbalajobi, D. T., & Oluwalogbon, L. A. (2019). The
Nigerian Senate and the politics of the non-passage of the gender equality
bill. African Journal of Political Science and International Relations, 13(3),
17-23. .https://doi.org/10.5897/AJPSIR2019.1150
Oyěwùmí, O. (1997). The invention of
women: Making an African sense of western gender discourses. University
of Minnesota Press. https://books.google.com.ng/books?id=G6bobv2boIYC
Peters, J. S., &
Wolper, A. (Eds.). (1995). Women's rights, human rights:
International feminist perspectives (1st ed.).Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315656571
Petersen, M. J. (2020). Freedom of
religion or belief and women’s rights (Briefing Paper #4). The
Danish Institute of Human Rights. https://www.humanrights.dk/files/media/document/Brief_no4_03%20FINAL-a.pdf
Pietilä, H. (2007). The unfinished story
of women and the United Nations. United Nations Non-Governmental
Liaison Service.
Sen, A. (1999). Development as freedom. Alfred
A. Knopf.
Shivdas, M., &
Coleman, S. (Eds.). (2010). Without prejudice: CEDAW and
the determination of women’s rights in a legal and cultural context. Commonwealth
Secretariat. https://www.thecommonwealth-ilibrary.org/index.php/comsec/catalog/download/153/150/1096?inline=1
Sommers, C. H. (2010). CEDAW: Wrong
for women, wrong for America. American Enterprise Institute.https://www.aei.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/20100323-CEDAW-Sommers.pdf
UN Women. (n.d.). World conferences on women. https://www.unwomen.org/en/how-we-work/intergovernmental-support/world-conferences-on-women
United Nations Division for the Advancement of
Women. (n.d.). History of CEDAW.https://www.un.org/womenwatch/daw/cedaw/history.htm
United Nations General Assembly. (1972). Declaration
on the elimination of discrimination against women.
United Nations General Assembly. (1975). General
Assembly resolution endorsing the outcome of the World Conference of the
International Women's Year: A/RES/3520 (XXX). https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/198616?ln=en
United Nations General Assembly. (1976). United
Nations Decade for Women (A/RES/31/136). https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/199700?ln=en&v=pdf
United Nations General Assembly. (1979). Convention
on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women.
Wolbrecht,
C. (2010). The politics of women's rights: Parties, positions, and change.
In The Politics of Women's Rights. Princeton University Press. https://doi.org/10.1515/9781400831241
Zwingel, S. (2005). From intergovernmental organisations
to subnational change: A transnational perspective on the impact of
CEDAW. International Feminist Journal of Politics, 7(3), 400–424.
Zwingel,
S., & Zwingel. (2016). Translating International Women's Rights (Vol.
300). London: Palgrave Macmillan UK.
Zwingel, S. (2018, November 28). Ending
violence against women and girls requires radical commitmentnot another
treaty. Gender Policy Report. https://genderpolicyreport.umn.edu/ending-violence-against-women-and-girls-requires-radical-commitment-not-another-treaty/
0 Comments