Legal Laboratory & Pre-litigation Law House

06/06/2024

NDIC v. HERITAGE BANK

Let me put this in plainer terms.

If you have less than 2m Naira in your Microfinance Bank account, or less than 5m in your regular Deposit Money Bank account, your money is not insured in the event the bank fails. NDIC will not pay you a dime, and the Court will not hear you.

My Advice:

If you must save money in a bank, make sure it's a strong bank, and then, shine your eyes.

07/04/2024

ALIBI

Only the guilty goes to prison when good guys are in charge of law enforcement. But there are lots of bad guys everywhere.

If you are accused of a crime and you have an alibi, make sure you present the evidence at the earliest opportunity during investigation, so you don't get sentenced for a crime you didn't commit.

Good evening to page followers. Wishing us all a great week ahead, and a happy sallah celebration in advance.

26/09/2023

TRAVELING AND EVENING OUTINGS' SAFETY TIPS

When Traveling outside your safe zones;

1. Dress moderately, never flamboyantly.

2. If you are traveling by road in a public transport, choose your calls carefully. If you know the conversation will reveal your identity or the subject is sensitive, avoid the calls. You may simply send text to the person calling, saying you are in a public transport, and will call back when you get to your destination.

3. If you have an identity card, files or some personal documents that could give you away to criminals, either as a big fish or as a personal non-grata, drop them at home, or have them sent ahead as waybill.

4. If you have up to two android phones, leave one at home, especially the one containing your banking apps. You may remove the SIM Card and insert it inside a smaller phone. And for the other android phone you go out with, if it contains sensitive social media groups you belong to, rename the groups casually to avoid being easily profiled in the event it falls into the hands of criminals.

5. If you use wallets, get an extra one that will contain your ATM Cards, and another that will contain your few cash. And when going out, take only with you the cash wallet, and only one ATM Card, especially the one in which you have less money in the bank account,

6. Advisably, you may get any of these online Banking Debit Cards (like Opay, etc) that cost less in procedure to obtain, and have it funded as you step out, with only the minimum cash you'll need for emergencies.

7. During your trip, avoid making any place your regular restaurant, car wash, ATM Machine, Supermarket, Pharmacy, Gas Station, etc.

8. Avoid especially, places where you can't point to what you want through the glass and get served immediately. Some of such restaurants where you wait while they prepare your meals are red zones for poisoning, armed robbery, kidnapping and sundry crimes.

9. Avoid night outings generally during your trips. If you get hungry and must eat at night, order for food in your hotel room, or drink water and sleep. And, if you must go out by all means, don't drive in flashy or expensive cars. And, as much as you can, avoid the use of Uber, Bolt and other similar services at night.

10. Always have a small pocket book, where you can record contacts of persons to call during emergencies, in the event you lose all your phones or get robbed. Also ensure your pocket book contains other details like passwords to your social media accounts, bank accounts, account officers' contacts, etc so you can login from any phone quickly to have you logged out of all stolen devices, or seek prompt help with your service providers who will be asking you some security deatails.

11. If you ever get kidnapped, don't panic, cooperate with your abductors and be friendly. And make sure they contact only people that can help you, not those that will complicate things or get them angered.

12. If you are not sure of the type of people you are giving your contacts during such trips, give them only your PressOne Contact Number. Once they call the number, your service provider will route the call to your real line, and you can interact freely without fear of being tracked.

13. Immediately after any incidence of theft, robbery or release by kidnappers, go straight to the nearest Police Station to lodge your complaint, and make sure you get a Police Report, to avoid being implicated with your credentials in crimes you know nothing about.

14. Above all, pray to God when you go out, for safety and safe return.

Things are currently tense in Nigeria, breeding insecurity and making the streets very unpredictable.

SAFETY, THEY SAY, BEGINS WITH YOUR MINDSET.

08/08/2023

WRONG FREEZING OF BANK ACCOUNTS

If your bank account was ever frozen by your bank acting on a false complaint, and/or without an order of Court, we are willing to help.

You can reach out to us on WhatsApp, for details on how to get redress.

08/08/2023

Police Procedures vs Accused’s Freedom to Write Statements - By Wahab Sh*ttu (SAN)

The right of the Accused to choose to give a statement to the police upon arrest is enshrined in the foremost provisions of the apex law of the federation, including the Administration of Criminal Justice Act 2015 and the Police Act of 2020. Yet, the constant reminder that the Accused is denied these rights is most highlighted in our criminal justice today where the extra-judicial statement of the Accused upon arrest is mandatory.

This Article begs the question, of whether Chapter IV of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria vis-à-vis the provisions of the Administration of the Criminal Justice Act and the Police Act is not a shield for an Accused who wishes to abstain from giving a statement.

INTRODUCTION
When individuals find themselves in the intimidating situation of being arrested and detained at a police station, it is crucial for them to understand their rights. One significant right that often causes confusion is the decision to write a statement. It is essential to demystify Nigerian police procedures and clarify that writing statements is a voluntary act, protected by law.

First and foremost, it is important to know that no police officer has the right to force anyone to write a statement when in custody. The act of providing a statement in police custody should always be a matter of free will and not compulsion. This fundamental principle ensures that individuals are not coerced into providing self-incriminating evidence or statements against their own interests. This is in line with the provision of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA) 2015.

“Where a suspect is arrested on allegation of having committed an offence, his statement shall be taken, if so wishes to make a statement.”

1 Additionally, every person has the right to remain silent when interacting with the police. If detained, it is within your rights to request that your lawyer be present before saying or writing anything. Even if you do not have a lawyer, you can choose a trusted person to be present during the process. This 1 S. 17(1) ACJA 2015 safeguard ensures that you have adequate legal representation or support before making any statements that could impact your case.

2. To further solidify these rights, the Nigeria Police Act of 2020 and the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA) of 2015 explicitly affirm the right of suspects to decide whether or not they want to write statements. Section 60 of the Nigeria Police Act and section 17 of the ACJA specifically state that the act of writing statements by a suspect should be voluntary.

3 According to the ACJA, suspects have the right to remain silent and cannot be compelled to give any statement that may incriminate them. The legislation emphasizes that suspects must be informed of this right prior to any questioning. Furthermore, if a suspect chooses to provide a statement, they have the right to consult with a legal practitioner of their choice before doing so. These rights are foremost enshrined under chapter IV of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria as Amended 2011 as regards the Accused person’s right to remain silent. This position has been credence to, in the case of Omirinde v. F.R.N

“… failure to comply with the provisions will render the statement impotent and incapable of being relied upon by the court to sustain a conviction. This is mandatory and cannot be waived in any circumstances.”

4 The ACJA ensures that the principle of voluntariness is respected throughout the entire criminal justice process. It requires that the police or any law enforcement agency obtain a voluntary statement from the suspect. Coercion, intimidation, or any form of force to extract a statement is strictly prohibited.

Understanding these legal provisions empowers individuals with the knowledge and confidence to assert their rights when facing police procedures. It is crucial to remember that you have the right to protect 2 S. 17(2) ACJA, 2015 3 See S.60 of the Nigerian Police Act 2020 4 (2017)LPELR – 44971 (CA), see also Olalekan v. State (2001)18 NWLR (pt 746)793 @ 819H – 820B.yourself, exercise your free will, and ensure that any statements made are voluntary and in your best interest.

CONCLUSION
In conclusion, demystifying Nigerian police procedures regarding writing statements is vital to protect the rights of individuals. Understanding that writing statements is a voluntary act, individuals can assert their rights, remain silent when necessary, and seek legal representation to navigate through the complexities of the justice system.

By upholding these rights, we can foster a fair and just society that respects the principles of individual freedom and protection under the law. The Nigeria Police Act and the ACJA serve as important legal frameworks that ensure the voluntariness of writing statements and safeguard the rights of suspects throughout the criminal justice process.

Credit:TheNation

By Wahab Sh*ttu (SAN) The right of the Accused to choose to give a statement to the police upon arrest is enshrined in the foremost provisions of the apex law of the federation, including the Administration of Criminal Justice Act 2015 and the Police Act of 2020. Yet, the constant reminder that the....

28/06/2023

DEFAMATION

Name is very important in all human cultures, as it ascribes to the bearer a unique identity.

This identity, is naturally guarded with some level of emotions, explaining why people often get offended whenever something untrue is said about them, especially when the statement, oral or written, is demeaning, or capable of injuring their reputation.

This is why we have the law of defamation. So that, rather than take laws into their hands, aggrieved persons can seek redress in the law court when defamed.

In law, Defamation refers to the act of communicating false statements about a person to injure his reputation.

Defamation also involves lowering a person in the esteem of other members of the society, exposing him to hatred, contempt or ridicule, and causing people to shun or avoid him.

It also often involves discrediting a person's office, trade or profession, in order to injure his financial credit.

In Nigeria, Courts have defined defamation as involving the making of a statement concerning a person without lawful justification or excuse, which tend to expose him to public contempt, scorn, obloquy, ridicule, shame or disgrace, with intention to induce an evil opinion of him in the mind of right thinking persons, or to injure him in his profession, occupation or trade.

ONLINE DEFAMATION

Section 24(1)(b) of the Cybercrimes (Prohibition, Prevention) Act, 2015 provides as follows:

"Any person who knowingly or intentionally sends a message or other matter by means of computer systems or network that he knows to be false, for the purpose of causing annoyance, inconvenience danger, obstruction, insult, injury, criminal intimidation, enmity, hatred, ill will or needless anxiety to another, or causes such a message to be sent,...
..commits an offence under this Act, and shall be liable on conviction for a fine of not more than N7,000,000.00 or imprisonment for a term of not more than three years or to both such fine and imprisonment".

See also section 373 of the Criminal Code Act.

It should be noted, that that when someone posts something on social media, he is acting as a publisher, and can be sued for defamation, if the statement is made concerning another person and is false, especially where the statement is injurious to the other's reputation.

HOW TO PROVE AN ACTION FOR DEFAMATION

To succeed in an action in Defamation, the plaintiff must prove three important things:

1. That the words were defamatory,

2. That the words referred to the plaintiff, and

3. That the words were published (to at least one person other than the plaintiff).

TYPES OF DEFAMATION

Defamation are of two types: LIBEL, and SLANDER.

LIBEL

In simple terms, the dissemination of a defamatory comment in written or permanent form is referred to as libel.

This could be an email, a blog post, a tweet, a text, a Facebook or WhatsApp post, a newspaper article, a television or radio broadcast, a video clip uploaded to the internet, or even a handwritten letter.

Libel could be filing a false domestic violence action against a spouse or sexual harassment complaint against a coworker, which could lead to any of the conditions for defamation.

SLANDER

On the other hand, slander refers to non-permanent forms of defamatory expression, including comments and gestures.

This could be a derogatory statement made in public or a private remark that is later reported.

For instance if Mr. A, in an interview, says that Mr. C, who is a branch manager to a bank, is incompetent and a fraudulent, leading to the suspension from work pending Investigation.

Mr. C would be liable, if after Investigation, the statement turned out to be false.

LIBEL IS ACTIONABLE PER SE

This means that whenever a libel content is published, the law will presume that damages have been caused to the plaintiff's reputation and will award him general damages by way of compensation.

In the case of Sketch v. Ajagbomkeferi 1989 1 NWLR (PT 100) 678 SC Wali JSC 695, paragraphs C-D, the Supreme Court held, that once a case of libel has been established, the victim is entitled to general damages as compensation, for the loss of his reputation and emotional distress, as well as aggravated damages, if the author/publisher is unapologetic or remorseful, and his actions are calculated out of malice, or if he persists in an unsubstantiated plea of justification.

WHO CAN SUE FOR DEFAMATION?

Individuals, businesses, and other legal entities can file a libel or slander claim if they feel the defamatory statement is directed at them.

It is the High Court of the State where the infraction took place that has jurisdiction to adjudicate over defamation cases, and this, by implication, applied also to online defamation.

VULGAR ABUSE

It is important to note that a statement is not defamatory if it is mere vulgar abuse.

What does that mean?

A vulgar abuse is an 'insulting' statement made in the heat of passion.

For example, in Bakare v. Ishola [1959] W.N.L.R. 106, there was a fight between the plaintiff and the defendant. In the heat of passion, the defendant said in the presence of onlookers, "ole ni o, Elewon, iwo ti o sese ti ewon de yi." This in English meant, "You are a thief. Ex-convict. You who have just come out of prison."

The court in this case held that the statement was mere vulgar abuse, and not defamatory.

PUBLICATION

There must have been publication of the words or materials complained about in order to bring a libel suit.

The law recognizes and punishes the communication of defamatory information to third persons, not the actual writing or speaking of the defamatory information.

Publication refers to making the defamatory content known to someone other than the person about whom it was written or calling the attention of someone else to it after it has been written.

Any conduct by a person that conveys the defamatory connotation of the matter to third parties is also considered publication.

In law, any defamatory communication to someone other than the person who has been defamed would be considered publishing.

Publication will also include words legibly marked on any substance whatever, or by any sign or object signifying such matter otherwise than by words and may be expressed either directly or by insinuation or irony.

It is immaterial whether at the time of the publication of the defamatory matter, the person concerning whom such matter is published is living or dead.

AWARD OF DAMAGES

In the case of Basorun v. Ogunlewe 2000 1 NWLR (PT 640) 221 CA, the court held that defamation, spoken or written, is always actionable and even if damages is not proved, the law will infer damage needed to establish the action in the following circumstances:

1. When the words are written or printed,

2. When the words spoken impute a crime punishable with imprisonment,

3. When they impute certain disease naturally excluding the patient from social in*******se, or

4. When words spoken of a person following a calling, end spoken of him in that calling, which impute to him unfitness for or misconduct in that calling.

In Conclusion, a person's reputation and good name are protected by law, and when they are sullied or injured without cause or justification, the person is entitled to a form of compensation.

NB:

We are in the age of social media, and people should understand the gross implication of their actions online.

Depending on the party aggrieved and his reputation in the society, a party sued for defamation may be liable in damages for millions of Naira, and, if he has no properties or money in the bank to satisfy the judgement debt, may be remanded in prison until the full sum of the judgement debt is paid.

Please drop your comments, hit our "Like" botton and follow our page for more and share, if you found this article interesting, Everyone

28/06/2023

© alex's Free Legal Clinic, aided by Legal Laboratory and Pre-litigation Law House.

28/05/2023

ASSAULT AND BATTERY

In Tort, Assault refers to the unlawful act of putting someone in reasonable fear of imminent harm to his or her person, while battery implies the actual unlawful contact with another person’s body without his or her consent.

In other words, if someone throws an object at you, or raises his or her fist to hit you, or points a gun, and you were as a result under some apprehension of imminent harm, the tortious act of assault is complete, even if the object or the fist thrown did not touch you. And same will apply, even if the gun pointed at you was never loaded or fired.

Where the object or the fist thrown hits you, however, you have a case of assault and battery.

If, on the other hand, you didn’t see it coming, and someone hits you suddenly with an object, or stabs you, or projects some heat or rays towards you, with such force or intention, as to cause harm, you have a case of battery.

These unlawful acts are actionable in torts, and the offender, known as a “tortfeasor”, would be liable in damages if you sue.

The tortuous acts are also criminal, and punishable under the Nigerian Criminal Codes Act, with various degrees of imprisonment, depending on the particular nature of infraction(s) committed, and depending on whether or not it occasioned harm.

Curiously, under Section 252 of the Criminal Code Act, the two infractions are summed up in one as “Assault”, with the code making no single mention of battery as a criminal offence.

Section 252 of the Criminal Code Act particularly provides as follows:
“A person who strikes, touches, or moves, or otherwise applies force of any kind to the person of another, either directly or indirectly, without his consent, or with his consent, if the consent is obtained by fraud, or who by any bodily act or gesture attempts or threatens to apply force of any kind to the person of another without his consent,…is said to assault that other person, and the act is called an assault.”.

Premised on the foregoing, a person who assaults or batters another without his or her consent is liable in torts for damages, and to a term of imprisonment.

A person will not be liable, however, for touching you simply to draw your attention to something, or for touching you in the course of your participation in a sporting event.

A person will equally not be liable for body contact in a crowded place, except where it could be shown that he roughly shoved himself through the crowd to push his way through.

A law enforcement agent who is lawfully proceeding to effect your arrest for a crime will also not be liable for assault or battery, where he or she touches your body for the purpose of protecting you from a mob, or to have you restrained if you resist arrest, or where there is reasonable apprehension of escape.

Under certain circumstances, however,…

…if you don’t want a law enforcement agent to touch your body during arrest, you can simply tell the agent, that you are not resisting arrest or running, and that he or she should not touch your body….

Where the agent, in such situation, defies your request and touches your body without basis, the law agent would be liable for trespass to your person,...unless the agent can prove, that you were considered a dangerous person, or wanted for a very serious crime involving violence.

You should know, however, that if you attempt to escape after the agent honours your request not to touch or place you under restraints, the law enforcement agent, under section 271 of the criminal code Act, has the power to shoot and kill you, if the offence for which you were arrested Is punishable with death, or with imprisonment for 7 years and above.

Section 271 of the Criminal Code Act specifically provides as follows:
“When a peace officer or police officer is proceeding lawfully to arrest,…..a person for an offence which is a felony,……and the person sought to be arrested takes to flight in order to avoid arrest, IT IS LAWFUL FOR THE PEACE OFFICER OR POLICE OFFICER....TO USE SUCH FORCE AS MAY BE REASONABLY NECESSARY TO PREVENT THE ESCAPE OF THE PERSON SOUGHT TO BE ARRESTED, AND, if the offence is such that the offender may be punished with death or with imprisonment for seven years or more, MAY KILL HIM IF HE CANNOT BY ANY MEANS OTHERWISE BE ARRESTED.”.

Now, sadly, we have situations where high-handed and overzealous law enforcement agents act in excess of their powers while effecting arrests, sometimes brutalizing their “victims” without any lawful justification.

If you ever experience such barbaric brutality and you don’t take it up because you “don’t have time”, especially where you are innocent of the allegations levied, you should know that you are by your conduct “legalizing” such illegalities, and that it will continue to get worse as long as people like you continue to demonstrate similar nonchalance.

Now, besides involvements with law enforcement agents, where anyone assaults or batters you without consent, apart from approaching the Court for damages in civil redress, you may petition the police or other security agencies of your choice, to have the person arrested and charged to Court.

PUNISHMENT FOR ASSAULT

Under section 351 of the Criminal Code Act, assault is ordinarily punishable with one year imprisonment.

Where the assault is committed with intent to have carnal knowledge of a male against the order of nature, or where a female is assaulted with intent to commit r**e, the offences are punishable under sections 352 and 358 respectively, with 14 years imprisonment.

Also, as outlined under sections 353 – 356, other types of assaults are generally punishable with 3 years imprisonment, including resisting of arrest. But, an assault with intent to rob another person is punishable under section 403 with NOT LESS THAN 14 YEARS IMPRISONMENT, and NOT MORE THAN 20 YEARS.

SELF DEFENCE

Now, it is important to consider the option of self defence in this short legal awareness drive, including the comics involved.

Under sections 286 of the Criminal Code Act, it is lawful to defend yourself against unprovoked assault, using the same force or weapon commensurate with the force or weapon of attack.

And, where the assault from your assailant is likely to result in your death, you are entitled under the said sections, to protect yourself to the same extent,…and you won’t be liable in the circumstances for murder, if the death of the your assailant is thereby occasioned.

A typical example is where a thief invades your house with arms, or where a gangster attempts to kill you with a machete. If you have a licensed gun, or you have a commensurate machete, you may lawfully kill the assailant, if he cannot otherwise be stopped.

In a case of provoked assault under section 287, however, that is, where you first assaulted the other person with intent to kill, the defence in 286 will not be available, where your victim eventually dies. It will also not matter in the circumstances, that the deceased tried to defend himself with the same measure of force. And, the weapon with which you initiated the attack, will be relevant in determining your intent when you initiated the attack.

Before drawing the curtains on this subject, it is instructive to counsel, that since no one can fully anticipate the result or outcome of a simple unprovoked assault of another person, it is very important for every rational human being to work seriously on self temperament.

So many people have become murder suspects, are rotting in jail on account of their inability to manage their temperament, and many more on account of the unintended outcome of their actions in the heat of anger.

It is also advisable to avoid arguments in public places with people you don’t know. Such people may be armed with dangerous weapons or charms, and may disappear into thin air the moment you get hurt.

THE COMIC –

Since it appears that the Criminal Code Act does not contemplate criminalizing a female assaulting a male with intent to r**e...

…will it be lawful for a man to defend himself with a commensurate force or weapon of assault, against a woman attempting to r**e him?

And, women being naturally weaker, what happens if the woman gets seriously injured in the process and turns to allege that you were in fact the person that tried to r**e her?

Please drop your comments and follow our page for more, if you found this article interesting.

28/05/2023

© alex's Free Legal Clinic, aided by Legal Laboratory and Pre-litigation Law House.

19/05/2023

"WITHOUT PREJUDICE"

Section 196 of the Evidence Act, 2011 provides as follows:

“A statement in any document marked “without prejudice” made in the course of negotiation for settlement of a dispute out of Court shall not be given in evidence in any civil proceedings in proof of the matters stated in it.”

The principle provided under Section 196 of the Evidence Act as replicated above is known as the WP Rule.

By this Rule, if you are trying to settle a dispute, and you intend to admit liability, make concessions, enter compromises or apologise in writing for an infraction, the WP Rule should be on your mind to prevent the other party from using against you later, any statement you make in the process, whether in writing or verbally.

In other words, before you sign that letter or document, go over it again to be sure that every line reflects your intention, and if you have mixed feelings it could be used against you later, mark it "WITHOUT PREJUDICE".

By doing so, you are saying "this document I signed cannot be used against me in evidence before the law court".

It is like saying, "while I am trying to reach a settlement with you, I'm not admitting any part of the case or waiving any arguments or rights - so, my offers to achieve a commercial deal or apologise, are without prejudice to my primary position that I'm right and you're wrong'.

The same way documents could be marked "Without Prejudce", negotiation meetings are sometimes held without prejudice too, by executing a prior written agreement on terms. In which case, even if the meeting is recorded, comments or admissions made in the meeting cannot be used by any of the parties against the other.

The WP rule prevents statements made in a genuine attempt to settle an existing dispute from being put before the court as evidence of admissions against the interest of the party that made them.

Once a document or meetings are marked WP, correspondences and discussions are confidential and cannot be shown to the court or any other party (unless all parties to the communication agreed to some exceptions).

So, if you are going to sign a written apology to end a dispute, or you are going to make written concessions that you are not quite sure would seal an agreement with the other party, don't forget to boldly write the magic word "WITHOUT PREJUDICE" on the document, usually at the top to the right (or anywhere it would be seen clearly.

There are a few exceptions, however, to the WP Rule. The rule is not absolute, and a WP document may still be used in Court under certain circumstances.

You cannot use the Rule as a shield from prosecution for crime, and a document marked WP will generally be admissible in the law court, if it contains no statement of admission by the party making it.

If you found this legal awareness insight impressive, please don't forget to like our page on Facebook and double-tap the notification bell.

18/05/2023

© alex's Free Legal Clinic, aided by Legal Laboratory and Pre-litigation Law House.

18/05/2023

YOU, AND THE DOCTRINE OF LAST SEEN

In simple terms, the Doctrine Of Last Seen is a presumption in law, that the person "last seen" with a deceased person prior to his demise, bears the full responsibility for his death.

In other words, if you give someone a lift in your car, or had a date with a friend, or had a business meeting with an associate (whatever it was), and the person was later found dead, you will be held responsible for homicide in the absence of any information on the circumstances that led to his or her death.

CASE ILLUSTRATION:

NANCY AIWUYOR v. THE STATE (SC. 996C/2018)

JUDGMENT DELIVERED ON: JUNE 11, 2021

FACTS:

NANCY AIWUYOR (the Appellant) and two other persons were charged and tried for offences bothering on conspiracy, child stealing and murder, contrary to the provisions of Sections 516, 317 and 319 (1) of the Criminal Code Act.

Five witnesses testified for the prosecution; while the Appellant was the sole witness for herself.

The trial court convicted the Appellant and others for the offences charged, and they were sentenced to death for the offence of murder.

The Appellant’s appeal to the Court of Appeal, was dismissed. The Appellant further appealed to the Supreme Court.

The Appeal was also dismissed.

In this case, the child, who the Appellant and other accused persons conspired to steal, was not found up to the time that Appellant's trial commenced and ended.

The Court of Appeal believed and relied on the evidence that since the Appellant and the co-accused conspired and stole the missing child, who had not been seen or found for a period of seven years thereafter, there was the presumption of her death, and the Appellant had the duty to explain what happened to her because they were last seen with her.

As shown by the evidence, the Appellant and the 2nd accused person were the last persons seen with the victim, when she was handed over to them by the 1st accused person on the 24th February, 2009, and they took her away alive, but she had since then remained missing.

The Appellant has the duty to give or offer an acceptable explanation on the whereabouts, the condition or situation that the baby victim has been, from the time they took her away from the village, until she was traced or found if ever.

The fact that there was no direct evidence of her death or that her dead body was not found, would not affect or detract from the statutory presumption of her death, or its proof by the cogent and compelling circumstantial evidence placed before the trial court – STATE v SUNDAY (2019) 9 NWLR (Pt. 1676) 115.

The Supreme Court held further, that the lower court was right that the presumption provided for and envisaged in the provisions of Section 164(1) of the Evidence Act applied in the Appellant’s case, such that until rebutted by the Appellant, it was safe to say that the death of the child was proved beyond reasonable doubt in the circumstances of the case.

LESSON:

Firstly, if you are asked for a lift, but you know you won't be able to drop the person off where you will have witnesses, don't be shy, tell the person your movement schedule will not accommodate him or her.

Secondly, be careful with appointments generally, and when an appointment is over, always make sure you have witnesses that you have parted ways with the other party.

If this legal awareness insight made your day, please don't forget to like our page and double-tap the notification bell.

18/05/2023

© alex's Free Legal Clinic, aided by Legal Laboratory and Pre-litigation Law House.