For years, efforts to strengthen legal protection for women and children in Kano have confronted the same fundamental challenge: protections discussed, advocated for and incorporated into proposed legislation must ultimately pass through the legislative process before they can become enforceable law.
That responsibility places the Kano State House of Assembly at the centre of the state’s unfinished gender justice reform.
Our engagement today with members of the House focuses on the Kano State Penal Code Amendment Bill 2021, which incorporates key protections drawn from the Violence Against Persons Prohibition framework, as well as the broader legislative and oversight measures required to strengthen Kano’s response to violence against women and children.
The discussion builds on years of advocacy informed by direct work with survivors, where gaps in legal protection are compounded by delays in reporting, weak referral systems, evidentiary challenges, limited survivor-support services and fragmented institutional response.
The legislative question is therefore not simply whether Kano needs stronger protections. It is how those protections can move from an unfinished reform process into a legal framework capable of supporting prevention, survivor protection and accountability.
Advancing an unfinished legislative process
The harmonisation of key VAPP provisions into the Kano State Penal Code Amendment Bill 2021 represents an important stage in the effort to strengthen the state’s legal response to gender-based violence.
The process, however, remains incomplete.
Today’s engagement examines the implications of that delay for survivors and for the institutions expected to respond when violence occurs.
Clear legislation matters because it establishes the legal basis on which institutions act. It defines prohibited conduct, provides protections and remedies, clarifies responsibilities and strengthens the framework available to investigators, prosecutors and courts.
Where reform remains pending, important protections also remain outside the enforceable legal framework.
Our discussion therefore focuses on the need to advance the legislative process while ensuring that the provisions ultimately adopted are clear, implementable and responsive to the realities emerging from survivor cases across Kano.
Bringing survivor experience into legislative reform
Legal reform is strongest when it responds to the problems people encounter in practice.
Our work with survivors continues to identify barriers that extend across the protection and justice pathway: delayed reporting, pressure to conceal abuse, difficulty accessing specialised services, gaps in medical documentation, weak referral, lengthy case progression and insufficient coordination between institutions.
These experiences provide an important evidence base for legislative consideration.
Today’s discussion examines how law can respond more effectively to the forms of violence women and children experience while also supporting the institutions responsible for implementing those protections.
This includes considering whether the legal framework provides sufficient clarity for prevention, investigation, prosecution, survivor protection and safeguarding, and whether it addresses the realities of cases involving children and other survivors who may be particularly vulnerable.
The purpose of bringing this evidence into the legislative conversation is not simply to advocate for passage of a Bill. It is to ensure that the resulting law is capable of addressing the protection gaps that made reform necessary in the first place.
Legislation must be matched by institutional capacity
Passing stronger legislation is essential, but enactment alone will not create a functioning protection system.
The institutions expected to implement the law must understand their responsibilities and have the capacity to fulfil them.
Police need to investigate effectively. Prosecutors require strong case files and clear legal provisions. Health institutions must provide appropriate care and documentation. Social welfare services need systems capable of protecting and supporting survivors. Schools require safeguarding mechanisms. Referral between these institutions must also function.
Today’s engagement therefore considers the relationship between legislation and implementation from the outset.
A law that imposes responsibilities without clear institutional arrangements, adequate services or corresponding resources risks creating protections that remain difficult to realise in practice.
This is why the legislative process must connect with the wider institutional conversations underway across Kano.
The objective is to ensure that stronger legal protection is accompanied by a realistic understanding of what implementation requires.
Legislative oversight as part of accountability
The role of the House does not end when legislation is passed.
Effective protection also depends on whether government institutions implement their responsibilities, whether resources reach priority services and whether gaps identified through practice are addressed.
Legislative oversight is therefore an important part of the wider accountability framework.
Today’s discussion considers how the House can contribute not only through lawmaking, but through continued scrutiny of the institutions responsible for delivering protection and justice.
Where laws establish obligations for ministries and agencies, oversight can help determine whether those responsibilities are being fulfilled.
Where survivor-support infrastructure remains inadequate, legislative scrutiny can draw attention to the gap.
Where implementation requires budgetary provision, the relationship between legislative priorities, appropriation and institutional performance becomes particularly important.
This makes the House a critical link between the legal framework, public resources and institutional accountability.
Building a legal framework that can work in practice
The wider consultations underway across Kano continue to demonstrate that gender-based violence cannot be addressed by one institution acting alone.
Religious and traditional leaders influence prevention, disclosure and early referral. Health institutions address immediate care and documentation. Social welfare systems support protection and recovery. Security agencies investigate. Prosecutors and courts pursue accountability.
The House of Assembly determines an essential part of the framework within which all of these institutions operate.
Today’s engagement therefore brings the legislative dimension into the wider reform process: strengthening the law, clarifying institutional responsibilities and ensuring that the legal framework reflects the protection challenges identified through survivor experience and institutional consultation.
The immediate priority is to move the unfinished reform process forward while maintaining attention to implementation, oversight and accountability.
For survivors, the significance is practical.
Legal protection should not remain an aspiration contained in a pending Bill. It must become part of an enforceable system capable of protecting women and children when they need it.