BY: EDREEZ NGULDE, AUGUST 26, 2026/ 11:38AM

There is a difficult conversation that our society must be willing to have: when we claim to be correcting people in the name of morality, are we actually reforming them or are we sometimes humiliating them?

This is not an argument against religion. It is not an attack on Islam, and it is not a call to abandon moral guidance. Rather, it is a call for responsibility, accountability and respect for human dignity in the way moral and religious regulations are enforced.

In Northern Nigeria, Hisbah organizations have played a visible role in promoting public morality and encouraging people to avoid behaviour considered harmful to society. Many people support the idea of guiding members of the community toward better conduct. However, the existence of a legitimate objective does not mean that every method used to achieve that objective should automatically be accepted.

Good intentions do not make every action lawful or morally right.

When a person is accused of wrongdoing, the objective should ultimately be correction and rehabilitation not destruction of the person's dignity.

If someone has made a mistake, particularly a young person, what happens after the arrest matters enormously. If the individual is counselled, educated and given an opportunity to understand the consequences of their actions, society may gain a better citizen.

But if that person's image is publicly displayed, their private information is exposed, their belongings are taken without proper legal authority, or they are subjected to unnecessary humiliation, we must ask a serious question:

Are we correcting the person, or are we creating a permanent social punishment for a temporary mistake?

Human beings make mistakes. One of the most important principles of any civilized society is that a person accused of wrongdoing should still retain their dignity and basic rights.

Publicly displaying an accused person's photograph or video before due process can have consequences that extend far beyond the original incident. The internet does not forget easily. A photograph uploaded today can remain online for years, affecting someone's employment, education, relationships and reputation long after the matter has ended.

This is particularly dangerous for young people.

A young person who commits a minor offence should not necessarily be condemned to a lifetime digital record of that mistake. If the purpose of enforcement is rehabilitation, then we should consider whether public humiliation actually helps achieve that goal.

There is also a serious question surrounding the handling of people's mobile phones and private information.

A mobile phone today contains an extraordinary amount of personal information: photographs, private conversations, financial information, family contacts, business records and personal documents. Taking someone's phone, searching its contents or exposing information from it should not be treated as an insignificant matter.

Privacy is part of human dignity.

Where authorities have lawful grounds to seize or examine a device, there should be clear procedures governing how that is done, what information can be accessed, who can access it and what happens to the information afterwards.

No organization should operate on the assumption that moral authority automatically gives unlimited authority over another person's private life.

We must also distinguish between guidance and punishment.

If an organization is established primarily to promote morality and encourage good conduct, its strongest weapon should not necessarily be humiliation or fear. Its strongest weapon should be education, counselling, persuasion and rehabilitation.

A person who has been arrested and treated with dignity may leave the experience determined to change.

A person who has been publicly humiliated may instead leave feeling rejected, angry and stigmatized.

That distinction matters.

Islam itself places enormous importance on human dignity, repentance and the possibility of reform. The purpose of moral correction should be to bring people closer to what is right, not to permanently destroy them because of a mistake.

The Qur'an teaches believers not to ridicule or insult one another, and it repeatedly emphasizes repentance and God's mercy. These principles should challenge everyone who claims to act in the interest of morality.

We must therefore ask ourselves what kind of society we want to build.

Do we want a society where people are afraid to seek help because they fear public humiliation?

Or do we want a society where people who make mistakes can be corrected, educated and given a genuine opportunity to become better?

The answer should be obvious.

This is why I am calling for greater accountability and clearer rules governing the activities of Hisbah and other bodies involved in public morality enforcement.

There should be clear boundaries concerning arrest, detention, searches, seizure of personal property, photography, publication of suspects' identities and the handling of private information.

There should also be mechanisms through which citizens can report abuse and obtain independent review when they believe their rights have been violated.

This does not mean that people should be free to violate the law without consequences.

It means that enforcement itself must operate within the law.

A society cannot claim to be defending morality while allowing the methods of enforcement to become immoral or unlawful.

We should also invest more in rehabilitation. Where a person has committed a minor offence, counselling, education, community-based rehabilitation and appropriate referral may sometimes achieve more than public humiliation.

Our young people need correction, but they also need hope.

They need boundaries, but they also need the opportunity to change.

They need accountability, but they must not be stripped of their humanity.

As a society, we should never confuse accountability with humiliation.

And we should never assume that because someone has been accused of doing something wrong, every right they possess has disappeared.

I believe Hisbah and similar institutions can make a positive contribution to society when they operate within clearly defined legal boundaries, respect human dignity and focus on genuine rehabilitation.

This conversation should therefore not be interpreted as an attack on religion or morality.

It is a call to make our enforcement of morality more lawful, more compassionate and more effective.

If our ultimate goal is to build a society where people become better, then we should measure success not by how many people we arrest or how many embarrassing photographs we publish, but by how many people we successfully help to change their lives.

A person's worst moment should not automatically become their permanent identity. Correction should restore dignity not destroy it.