ASSAULT

TOPIC OF THE DAY

- DEFINITION

- TYPES OF ASSUALT

- ELEMENTS OF ASSAULT

- CONSENT

Definition of Assault

Assault, in legal terms, generally refers to an act that creates an apprehension in another person of an imminent, harmful, or offensive contact. It is important to note that actual physical contact is not necessary for an act to be classified as assault. The mere threat or attempt, coupled with the apparent ability to carry out the threat, can constitute assault.

In Nigerian law, assault is defined under section 252 of the Criminal Code Act, which applies to the Southern States, and section 263 of the Penal Code, which applies to the Northern States provides that an assault is any act that intentionally or recklessly causes another to apprehend immediate and unlawful violence.

Types of Assault

1. Simple Assault: This is the basic form of assault, where there is an intentional creation of apprehension of imminent harm without physical contact. For instance, raising a fist in a threatening manner can constitute simple assault.

2. Aggravated Assault: This form involves more serious circumstances, such as the use of a weapon or intent to commit another serious crime. It generally carries more severe penalties. An example is pointing a gun at someone even if it is not fired.

3. Sexual Assault: This includes any non-consensual sexual act forced upon another person. It ranges from unwanted touching to rape. See section 358 of the Criminal Code Act and section 283 of the Penal Code Act which addresses sexual assault.

4. Assault Occasioning Actual Bodily Harm (ABH): This type of assault results in physical harm or injury that is more than transient or trifling. For example, hitting someone and causing bruising or a cut can be classified as ABH. See section 355 of the Criminal Code Act and section 265 of the Penal Code Act which defines assault occasioning harm.

5. Grievous Bodily Harm (GBH): This is the most serious form of assault, involving severe injury. It includes injuries such as broken bones or injuries requiring significant medical treatment.

Elements of Assault

1. Intent: The perpetrator must have intended to cause apprehension of immediate harm or offensive contact in the victim. This intent can be direct or inferred from reckless behavior. See the case of Akpan v. State (1992) 6 NWLR (Pt. 248) 439 which dealt with the elements of assault and the importance of intent and apprehension in constituting assault.

2. Apprehension of Harm: The victim must reasonably apprehend immediate and unlawful violence. The apprehension must be one that a reasonable person would experience under the circumstances.

3. Immediacy: The threat of harm must be imminent. There must be a present ability to carry out the threat, even if no physical contact occurs. See the case of Agbo v. State (2006) 6 NWLR (Pt. 977) 545 which emphasized the significance of immediacy and the perception of threat in determining assault.

4. Unlawfulness: The act must be unlawful. If the action is legally justified or consented to, it may not constitute assault.

Consent in Assault Cases

Consent can serve as a defense to assault in some cases. If the victim willingly consents to the act, it may not be considered assault. However, the consent must be:

1. Freely Given: Consent obtained through coercion, fraud, or under duress is not valid.

2. Informed: The person giving consent must understand the nature of the act to which they are consenting.

3. Specific to the Act: General consent does not apply to all acts; it must be specific to the particular act of assault.

In cases involving sexual assault, consent is a critical factor. See The Nigerian Violence Against Persons (Prohibition) Act 2015 which specifically addresses issues of consent in sexual offenses.

OFFENCES AGAINST PERSONS: OFFENCES ENDANGERING LIFE OR HEALTH

TOPIC OF THE DAY

- DEFINITION

- ACTUS INTENDED TO CAUSE HARM

- WOUNDING ACT

- GRIEVOUS HARM

Definition

Offences against persons encompass a range of criminal acts that directly harm or pose a threat to the physical or mental well-being of individuals. Within this category, offences endangering life or health are particularly serious, as they involve actions that can lead to significant injury, suffering, or even death. These offences are primarily codified in the Criminal Code Act and the Penal Code Act of Nigeria, depending on the jurisdiction (southern or northern states, respectively).

Actus Intended to Cause Harm

"Actus intended to cause harm" refers to the physical action or conduct by a perpetrator that is intentionally directed at causing injury or distress to another person. In the context of Nigerian law, such acts can range from physical assault to more severe forms of violence. See section 351 of the Criminal Code Act which deals with common assault, which is the application of force to another person without lawful justification and section 252 of the Penal Code which defines assault and criminal force, prescribing penalties for individuals found guilty of such acts and also the case of Iwueke v. State (2000) 2 NWLR (Pt. 645) 505 where the court held that for an act to constitute an assault, there must be an application of force, however slight, upon another person without their consent.

Wounding Act

A wounding act involves inflicting a physical injury that breaks the skin or causes significant tissue damage. This is a more serious form of assault, often categorized separately due to the severity of the harm caused. See section 332 of the Criminal Code Act which addresses unlawful wounding, stipulating that any person who unlawfully wounds another is guilty of a felony and section 246 of the Penal Code which provides for punishment for voluntarily causing hurt and also the case of Omotola v. State (2009) 15 NWLR (Pt. 1164) 564 where the court held that the prosecution must prove that the defendant inflicted an injury that caused a break in the continuity of the skin to establish the offence of wounding.

Grievous Harm

Grievous harm refers to serious bodily injury that causes permanent disfigurement, loss of function of any limb or organ, or substantial impairment of health. This is considered one of the most severe forms of offences against persons. See section 335 of the Criminal Code Act which defines grievous harm and prescribes severe penalties for anyone found guilty of causing such harm and section 248 of the Penal Code which deals with voluntarily causing grievous harm and outlines the penalties for such an offence and see also the case of Michael v. State (2008) 13 NWLR (Pt. 1104) 361 where the court defined grievous harm as harm that is both serious and long-lasting, requiring the prosecution to show that the injury inflicted had a substantial and enduring impact on the victim's health.

OFFENCES AGAINST THE PERSON: INFANTICIDE AND SUICIDE

TOPIC OF THE DAY

- Infanticide

- Suicide

- Killing an unborn child

- Concealing the birth of a child

- Duels

- Abortion

Infanticide

Infanticide refers to the act of a mother killing her newborn child. Under Nigerian law, infanticide is distinguished from murder, acknowledging the unique circumstances and the psychological state of the mother postpartum. See sections 327 of the Criminal Code Act and section 236 of the Penal Code Act and also the case of Queen v. Itule (1961), where the defendant was a mother charged with killing her infant. The court considered her mental condition postpartum and reduced the charge from murder to infanticide, acknowledging the psychological impact of childbirth.

Suicide

Suicide is the act of intentionally causing one's own death, and attempted suicide are both criminalized under Nigerian law, although there is ongoing debate about the appropriateness of this stance. See section 327 of the Criminal Code Act and section 231 of the Penal Code Act and also the case of Osawe v. State (1961), where the appellant was convicted of attempted suicide. The court upheld the conviction, reflecting the law's stance on criminalizing attempts to take one's own life.

Killing an Unborn Child

Killing an unborn child involves unlawfully causing the death of a fetus. This is treated as a serious offence under Nigerian law, with specific legal provisions addressing this crime. See section 328 of the Criminal Code Act and section 235 of the Penal Code Act and also the case of R. v. Edgal (1938), where the defendant was convicted of killing an unborn child through violent actions against the pregnant mother. This case highlighted the serious nature of this offence and the legal protections afforded to the fetus under Nigerian law.

Concealing the Birth of a Child

Concealing the birth of a child involves hiding the birth, typically to avoid detection of the child's death or related offences. See section 329 of the Criminal Code Act and section 237 of the Penal Code Act and also the case of Queen v. Ashiru (1961), where the defendant was charged with concealing the birth of a child. The court focused on the intent to conceal the birth to obstruct justice, emphasizing the law's objective to prevent the covering up of infanticide or suspicious stillbirths.

Duels

Dueling is an arranged combat between two individuals with deadly weapons, this is illegal under Nigerian law. Although it is rare in modern times, the law explicitly prohibits this practice. See section 86 of the Criminal Code Act and section 

108 of the Penal Code Act.

Abortion

Abortion is highly restricted in Nigeria and is only permitted under certain circumstances, primarily to save the life of the mother. The legal provisions are stringent, reflecting the country's stance on the sanctity of life. See sections 228 - 230 of the Criminal Code Act and sections 232 - 236 of the Penal Code Act and also the case of Queen v. Amalu (1954), where a medical practitioner was convicted for performing an illegal abortion. The case reinforced Nigeria's strict stance on abortion, with severe penalties for those who violate these laws.

HOMICIDES: MANSLAUGHTER

TOPIC OF THE DAY

- DEFINITION OF MANSLAUGHTER

- CLASSIFICATION OF MANSLAUGHTER

- UNLAWFUL MANSLAUGHTER

- STANDARD OF DANGEROUSNESS

- ACT OF OMISSION

- MENS REA OF MANSLAUGHTER

- KILLING BASED ON RECKLESSNESS

- CIVIL AND CRIMINAL NEGLIGENCE

Definition of Manslaughter

Manslaughter is defined as the unlawful killing of a human being without malice aforethought. It is a less severe charge than murder and typically involves situations where the perpetrator did not intend to cause death or serious harm. In Nigeria, manslaughter is governed by the Criminal Code in section 317 which defines manslaughter and outlines the punishment and section 319 which details the punishment for manslaughter, which can include life imprisonment and the Penal Code section 222 which defines culpable homicide not amounting to murder, which is equivalent to manslaughter and section 224 which prescribes the punishment for culpable homicide not amounting to murder, which can include imprisonment or death in certain circumstances.

Classification of Manslaughter

Manslaughter is generally classified into two main categories namely;

1. Voluntary Manslaughter: This occurs when a person kills another in the heat of passion, provoked by the victim, and without a prior intent to kill. The classic example involves a situation where the killer is provoked to a point of losing self-control.

2. Involuntary Manslaughter: This occurs when a person kills another without intending to do so, typically due to reckless or negligent behavior. This can be further subdivided into:

a. Unlawful Act Manslaughter: This is the killing resulting from an unlawful act that is dangerous and likely to cause harm.

b. Gross Negligence Manslaughter: This is the killing resulting from a grossly negligent act or omission that shows a disregard for the life and safety of others.

Unlawful Manslaughter

Unlawful manslaughter, also known as constructive manslaughter, occurs when a person commits an unlawful act that results in the death of another person. The act must be both unlawful and dangerous. An example would be a person committing an assault that inadvertently results in the victim's death. See the case of R v. Ikomi (1949) 12 WACA 408 where the defendant's act of administering an excessive dose of medicine led to the victim's death. The court found the act to be unlawful and dangerous, resulting in a conviction for manslaughter.

Standard of Dangerousness

The standard of dangerousness in manslaughter cases refers to whether the unlawful act was such that all sober and reasonable people would inevitably recognize it as an act that subjects another person to, at least, the risk of some harm resulting from it. It does not require that the accused intended to cause harm or that they foresaw the harm.

Act of Omission

Manslaughter can also occur through an act of omission, where the accused fails to fulfill a duty of care towards the victim, resulting in death. This is often seen in cases of gross negligence manslaughter. See the case of R v. Adekoya (1959) 4 FSC 207 where the defendant was convicted of manslaughter due to neglecting to provide necessary medical care for his child, leading to the child's death.

Mens Rea of Manslaughter

The mens rea, or mental state, required for manslaughter varies depending on whether the charge is for voluntary or involuntary manslaughter. For voluntary manslaughter, the mens rea includes an intent to kill or cause serious harm but mitigated by provocation or diminished responsibility. For involuntary manslaughter, the mens rea typically involves recklessness or gross negligence.

Killing Based on Recklessness

Recklessness involves the accused foreseeing that their actions might cause death or serious harm but proceeding anyway. This state of mind falls short of the intention required for murder but is sufficient for manslaughter. See the case of R v. Onwudiwe (1957) 2 FSC 10 where the defendant's reckless driving resulted in a fatal accident. The court found that the defendant foresaw the risk of harm but continued with the reckless behavior, leading to a conviction for manslaughter.

Civil and Criminal Negligence

Negligence, in the context of manslaughter, refers to the failure to exercise a reasonable standard of care that results in the death of another person. This can be divided into:

1. Civil Negligence: This is the breach of duty of care resulting in harm or loss, typically addressed through civil litigation and compensation.

2. Criminal Negligence: This is a more severe form of negligence where the breach of duty is so egregious that it warrants criminal penalties. This involves a gross deviation from the standard of care expected, resulting in manslaughter charges. See the case of R v. Adeyemi (1944) 10 WACA 27 where the defendant, a nurse, was found criminally negligent after failing to properly administer a life-saving procedure, resulting in the patient's death.

INTERVENING ACTS OF SELF PRESERVATION OR PREVENTION OF CRIME

TOPIC OF THE DAY

- BREAKING THE CHAIN OF CAUSATION

- THE BASIC RULE

- JUDICIAL ATTITUDE

- ISSUES OF FACTUAL AND LEGAL CAUSATION

- TEST IN ESCAPE CASES

Breaking the Chain of Causation

In criminal law, the concept of breaking the chain of causation refers to intervening acts that sever the causal connection between the defendant's actions and the resulting harm. Essentially, if a new, intervening act occurs after the defendant's actions, which is not reasonably foreseeable, it may absolve the defendant of liability for the harm caused.

The Basic Rule

The basic rule regarding breaking the chain of causation is that if an intervening act is deemed to be independent of the defendant's actions and breaks the chain of causation, the defendant may not be held criminally liable for the resulting harm.

Judicial Attitude

Nigerian courts generally adopt a cautious approach when assessing whether an intervening act breaks the chain of causation. They carefully examine the facts and circumstances of each case to determine the extent to which the defendant's actions contributed to the harm and whether any intervening acts were foreseeable.

Issues of Factual and Legal Causation

Factual causation involves establishing whether the defendant's actions were a factual cause of the harm suffered by the victim. Legal causation, on the other hand, concerns whether the defendant's actions were a legally significant cause of the harm, taking into account any intervening acts. See the case of R v. Blaue (1975) 1 WLR 1411 where the court held that the defendant was criminally liable for the victim's death, even though the victim refused a blood transfusion due to her religious beliefs. This decision emphasized the principle that defendants take their victims as they find them, including any pre-existing conditions or beliefs.

Test in Escape Cases

In escape cases, where a defendant's actions are considered a response to an immediate threat to life or safety, the test often applied is whether the defendant's actions were a reasonable response to the threat posed. If the defendant's actions are deemed reasonable in the circumstances, they may not be held criminally liable, even if their actions result in harm to another. See section 315 of the Criminal Code which addresses the concept of causation in Nigerian criminal law and the case of R v. Pagett (1983) 76 Cr App R 279 where the principle was established that if a person uses another as a shield against the police, and that person is then shot and killed by the police, the defendant can be guilty of manslaughter.

HOMICIDE: MURDER

TOPIC OF THE DAY

- ELEMENTS OF MURDER: ACTUS REUS

- THE MENS REA FOR MURDER

- CONSTRUCTIVE MALICE AND RECKLESSNESS

- WHO AND WHAT CAUSES KILLING

- FACTUAL CAUSATION

- LEGAL CAUSATION

- NOVUS ACTUS INTERVENIENS

Elements of Murder: Actus Reus

Actus reus refers to the physical act of committing murder. In Nigeria, this involves unlawfully causing the death of another person. See section 316 of the Criminal Code Act (CCA) which defines murder as causing the death of a person with the intention of causing death or with the intention of causing grievous harm and section 319 of the Criminal Code Act (CCA) which outlines the punishment for murder in Nigeria, stating that anyone found guilty of murder shall be sentenced to death.

Mens Rea for Murder

Mens rea refers to the mental state or intention behind the act. For murder, the mens rea requires specific intent or malice aforethought. Malice aforethought is the intention to cause death or grievous harm. The Nigerian legal system recognizes different forms of mens rea, including:

1. Express Malice: This involves a clear intention to kill, such as premeditated murder.

2. Implied Malice: Implied malice refers to situations where the circumstances surrounding the act indicate an intention to kill, even if there was no premeditation. An example could be killing someone during the commission of a felony.

3. Constructive Malice: Constructive malice is an important concept in Nigerian law. It applies when the defendant commits an act likely to cause death or grievous harm without justification or excuse, showing a reckless disregard for human life.

Constructive Malice and Recklessness

Constructive malice is closely related to recklessness, which involves consciously disregarding a substantial and unjustifiable risk that results in harm. In Nigerian law, recklessness can lead to a finding of constructive malice in murder cases. See the case of R v. Akalezi (1962) where the defendant stabbed the victim during a fight. The court held that the defendant's actions exhibited constructive malice because he acted recklessly, knowing that his actions could result in death or grievous harm.

Who and What Causes Killing?

Murder is often motivated by a myriad of factors, including but not limited to revenge, jealousy, greed, and even mental illness. Understanding the motivations behind murders helps authorities in apprehending perpetrators and bringing them to justice. See the case of R v. Ijokumu (1961) 1 ALL NLR 127, where the accused murdered his wife out of jealousy. This illustrates how emotions can drive individuals to commit heinous acts.

Factual Causation

Factual causation in murder cases hinges on proving that the accused's actions directly led to the victim's death. See the case of R v. Smith (1959) 2 QB 35, where the defendant stabbed the victim, causing injuries that ultimately led to death. The defendant was found guilty because his actions were deemed the factual cause of death.

Legal Causation

Legal causation delves into whether the accused's actions were the substantial and operating cause of death, as per Nigerian law. See the case of R v. Akpan (1964) 1 All NLR 492, where the defendant fatally wounded the victim, but it was the delayed medical treatment due to inadequate healthcare facilities that led to death. The court held that the defendant's actions were the legal cause of death, emphasizing the chain of events initiated by the defendant's actions.

Novus Actus Interveniens

Novus actus interveniens refers to a new intervening act that breaks the chain of causation between the defendant's actions and the victim's death. See the case of R v. Amao (1963) 3 All NLR 233, where the defendant stabbed the victim, but the victim's decision to refuse medical treatment constituted a novus actus interveniens. As a result, the defendant was not held liable for murder since the victim's actions severed the causal link.

UNLAWFUL HOMICIDE

TOPIC OF THE DAY

- DEFINITION

- OBSERVATIONS ON DEFINITION

- STATE ALLEGIANCE AND ALIEN ENEMY

- FELONIOUS HOMICIDE

Definition

Unlawful homicide refers to the illegal killing of one person by another, where the act does not fall under the umbrella of justifiable or excusable homicide. In Nigeria, unlawful homicide is primarily governed by the Criminal Code and the Penal Code, depending on the region.

Observations on Definition

Unlawful: The act of homicide becomes unlawful when it is not justified by law. This means that the killing is not done in self-defense, defense of others, or in accordance with any other legally recognized justification.

Intent: Intent plays a crucial role in determining unlawful homicide. It distinguishes between murder and manslaughter. Murder involves the deliberate and premeditated killing of another person, whereas manslaughter involves killing without premeditation or with diminished capacity.

Causation: There must be a causal link between the actions of the perpetrator and the death of the victim. This element is essential in establishing criminal liability.

Mens Rea: In many cases of unlawful homicide, the prosecution must prove the presence of mens rea, or a guilty mind, on the part of the perpetrator. This includes the intention to cause harm or recklessness regarding the potential consequences of one's actions.

State Allegiance and Alien Enemy

In Nigerian law, the concept of state allegiance and alien enemy may come into play in cases of unlawful homicide, particularly during times of war or conflict. The allegiance to one's country and the status of the victim or perpetrator as an alien enemy can influence the legal proceedings and potential consequences of the crime. See section 44 of the Criminal Code Act which provides for the defense of military necessity, which may apply in cases where a killing occurs during armed conflict. This section outlines the circumstances under which the killing of an enemy combatant may be considered lawful and the case of R v. Tawiah (1954) NRNLR 93 where the court considered the applicability of state allegiance and the status of the victim as an alien enemy. The defendant, Tawiah, was a soldier who killed an enemy combatant during wartime. The court had to determine whether the killing constituted unlawful homicide or was justified under the laws of war.

Felonious Homicide

Felonious homicide refers to the unlawful killing of another person with the intent to commit a felony. In Nigerian law, felonious homicide is treated as a serious offense and carries significant penalties upon conviction. See section 222 of the Criminal Code Act which defines felonious homicide and outlines the penalties for this offense. It establishes that anyone who commits felonious homicide is liable to suffer death as punishment and the case of R v. Adimora (1976) 11 SC where the defendant, Adimora, was charged with felonious homicide for killing a security guard while attempting to rob a bank. The court found Adimora guilty of felonious homicide, emphasizing the connection between the killing and the underlying felony of robbery.

LAWFUL HOMICIDE

TOPIC OF THE DAY

- WHO IS A HUMAN BEING?

- KINDS OF HOMICIDE

- LIMITATION IN THE HEAT OF WAR

- RIGHT TO LIFE

Who is a Human Being?

The legal definition of a human being in Nigeria is pivotal in determining the rights and protections afforded to individuals. According to Nigerian law, a human being is defined from conception to natural death. This means that from the moment of conception, an individual is considered a human being with legal rights and protections. This definition underscores the value placed on life and informs legal proceedings regarding issues such as abortion and homicide.

Kinds of Homicide

In Nigeria, homicide is broadly categorized into two main types: murder and manslaughter.

Murder: Murder is the intentional killing of another human being with malice aforethought. See section 316 of the Criminal Code Act (CCA) which defines murder as the unlawful killing of a person with the intention of causing death or grievous bodily harm and see the case of R v. Udo (1961) NWLR.

Manslaughter: Manslaughter, on the other hand, involves the unlawful killing of another human being without malice aforethought. It can be further classified into voluntary and involuntary manslaughter. Voluntary manslaughter occurs in the heat of passion or as a result of provocation, while involuntary manslaughter is unintentional, often resulting from negligence or recklessness. See section 317 of the CCA which provides legal definitions for manslaughter.

Limitations in the Heat of War

During times of war or armed conflict, the rules governing lawful homicide may undergo certain modifications or limitations. The Geneva Conventions and other international humanitarian laws provide guidelines on the treatment of individuals during armed conflicts. In Nigeria, the Armed Forces Act and other military regulations outline the rules of engagement and the circumstances under which lethal force may be used lawfully in combat situations. These regulations emphasize the principle of proportionality, requiring that the use of force be necessary and proportional to the threat posed.

Right to Life

The right to life is a fundamental human right enshrined in various legal instruments, including the Nigerian Constitution and international treaties ratified by Nigeria. See Section 33 of the Nigerian Constitution which guarantees the right to life, stating that "every person has a right to life, and no one shall be deprived intentionally of his life, save in execution of the sentence of a court in respect of a criminal offence of which he has been found guilty." This provision underscores the sanctity of life and imposes limitations on when lawful homicide can occur.

OFFENCES AGAINST PERSONS: INTRODUCTION

TOPIC OF THE DAY

- HOMICIDE

- MURDER

- MANSLAUGHTER

- SUICIDE AND SUICIDE PACT

- DOMESTIC VIOLENCE

- ASSAULT AND BATTERY

- DEPRIVATION OF LIBERTY

- SEXUAL OFFENCES

- OTHER OFFENCES AGAINST PERSONS

Introduction

In Nigerian law, offenses against persons encompass a wide range of criminal acts that directly harm or threaten the physical or mental well-being of individuals. These offenses are regulated by various statutes and judicial precedents aimed at protecting the rights and safety of individuals within the society.

Homicide

Homicide refers to the unlawful killing of another human being. In Nigerian law, homicide is primarily categorized into murder and manslaughter.

Murder

Murder is the most serious form of homicide, involving the intentional and unlawful killing of another person with malice aforethought. Malice aforethought implies the intention to cause death or grievous bodily harm. See section 316 of the Criminal Code Act which provides that any person who unlawfully kills another with malice aforethought commits murder and the case of R v. Akpan (1965) NWLR 179, where the court held that the accused's deliberate actions leading to the death of the victim constituted murder.

Manslaughter

Manslaughter, on the other hand, involves the unlawful killing of another person without malice aforethought. It can occur due to recklessness, negligence, or in the heat of passion. See section 317 of the Criminal Code Act which defines manslaughter and the case of R v. Musa (2000) 5 NWLR, where the court held that the accused's reckless driving, resulting in the death of a pedestrian, amounted to manslaughter.

Suicide and Suicide Pact

While suicide is not considered a criminal offense in Nigerian law, abetting or aiding suicide is unlawful. See section 327 of the Criminal Code Act which criminalizes the act of counseling, procuring, or assisting another person to commit suicide. Furthermore, entering into a suicide pact, where individuals agree to die together, is also prohibited.

Domestic Violence

Domestic violence encompasses various forms of abuse, including physical, emotional, sexual, and economic, perpetrated within domestic relationships. See The Violence Against Persons (Prohibition) Act 2015 (VAPP Act) which provides legal frameworks for addressing domestic violence in Nigeria. See also section 1 of the VAPP Act which defines domestic violence, while Section 18 outlines penalties for offenders.

Assault and Battery

Assault involves the intentional act of causing apprehension of harmful or offensive contact, while battery involves the actual physical contact without consent. See sections 351-355 of the Criminal Code Act which provides for offenses related to assault and battery and the case of A.G Lagos State v. Dosunmu (1989) 3 NWLR, where the court held that the accused's act of slapping the victim constituted assault and battery.

Deprivation of Liberty

Deprivation of liberty refers to unlawfully confining or restricting an individual's freedom of movement. See section 360 of the Criminal Code Act which criminalizes false imprisonment or wrongful confinement and the case of Mohammed v. State (2010) 3 NWLR, where the court ruled that the accused's act of unlawfully detaining the victim amounted to deprivation of liberty.

Sexual Offences

Sexual offenses encompass a range of acts such as rape, sexual assault, and indecent assault. See The Criminal Code Act and the Violence Against Persons (Prohibition) Act 2015 which contain provisions addressing sexual offenses and section 357 of the Criminal Code Act which defines rape, while the VAPP Act provides for offenses like sexual harassment and female genital mutilation.

Other Offences Against Persons

Other offenses against persons include offenses such as kidnapping, child abuse, and human trafficking. These offenses are regulated by various statutes, including the Criminal Code Act, the Child Rights Act, and the Trafficking in Persons (Prohibition) Enforcement and Administration Act.

PARTIES TO AN OFFENCE: ACCOMPLICES

TOPIC OF THE DAY

- ACCOMPLICES

- ACCESSORY AFTER THE FACT

- PERVERTING JUSTICE

- COMPOUNDING FELONY

- NEGLECT TO PREVENT FELONY

Accomplices

Accomplices are individuals who aid, abet, or assist in the commission of a crime, either before or during its perpetration. See section 80 of the Criminal Code Act (CCA) which stipulates that an accomplice is equally liable as a principal. See the case of R v. Udo (1962) 1 All NLR 246, where the court held that mere presence at the scene of a crime does not make one an accomplice unless there is active participation or encouragement.

Accessories After the Fact

Accessories after the fact are individuals who, knowing that a crime has been committed, assist the offender in escaping apprehension, trial, or punishment. See section 514 of the Criminal Code Act (CCA) which deals with accessories after the fact. An example is where X, knowing that Y has committed murder, helps Y flee the country to avoid arrest.

Perverting Justice

Perverting justice involves obstructing, perverting, or defeating the course of justice. See section 126 of the Criminal Code Act (CCA) which outlines offenses related to perverting justice. This can include actions such as tampering with evidence, bribing witnesses, or influencing jurors. See the case of R v. Ode (1976) 5 SC, where the court held that knowingly giving false evidence in court constitutes perverting justice.

Compounding Felony

Compounding felony occurs when a victim of a crime accepts compensation or some benefit in exchange for not pursuing prosecution against the offender. See section 405 of the Criminal Code Act (CCA) which prohibits compounding felony. For instance, if Z offers money to W to drop charges for theft, both Z and W could be charged with compounding felony.

Neglect to Prevent Felony

Individuals who have a legal duty to prevent the commission of a felony but fail to do so can be held liable. See section 54 of the Criminal Code Act (CCA) which imposes liability on those who neglect to prevent felony. An example is where a parent fails to prevent their child from engaging in criminal activities despite being aware of it.

PARTIES TO AN OFFENCE: PRINCIPAL OFFENDERS

TOPIC OF THE DAY

- PARTIES TO AN OFFENCE

- PRIMARY OFFENDER

- AIDER AND ABETTOR

- PERSONS WHO COUNSEL OR PROCURE

- INNOCENT AGENCY

- INVALID CONSIDERATION

- MINOR VARIATION

- BREAK IN THE CHAIN OF COUNSELING OR PROCURING

Parties to an Offence

In Nigerian criminal law, the concept of "parties to an offence" refers to individuals who are involved in the commission of a crime. These individuals may include principal offenders, aiders and abettors, and those who counsel or procure the commission of an offence.

Principal Offenders

Principal offenders are individuals who directly commit the crime. They are the ones who physically carry out the illegal act that constitutes the offence. For example, in a case of theft, the person who actually steals the property would be considered the principal offender as seen in the case of R v. Adeleke (1964) NMLR 130 and section 7 of the Criminal Code Act (CCA) which provides that "when an offense is committed, each of the following persons is deemed to have taken part in committing the offense and to be guilty of the offense, and may be charged with actually committing it, that is to say, every person who actually does the act or makes the omission which constitutes the offense."

Aider and Abettor

An aider and abettor is someone who assists, encourages, or facilitates the commission of a crime, even if they do not directly participate in the criminal act itself. They may provide support, advice, or resources to the principal offender. In Nigerian law, aiders and abettors are treated as if they had committed the offence themselves as seen in the case of R v. Salami (2008) 12 NWLR (Pt. 1101) 554 and section 85 of the CCA states that "any person who aids, abets, counsels or procures the commission of an offense shall be liable to be tried as a principal offender."

Persons who Counsel or Procure

Individuals who counsel or procure the commission of an offence are those who intentionally persuade, induce, or influence others to commit a crime. They may not directly participate in the criminal act but play a significant role in instigating it. In Nigerian law, those who counsel or procure an offence are considered equally liable as the principal offender as seen in the case of R v. Okoro (1988) 1 NWLR (Pt. 70) 692 and section 83 of the CCA holds that "any person who, with intent to procure the commission of any offense, commands, advises or encourages another person to commit that offense shall, if the offense is committed in consequence thereof, be deemed to have counselled and procured the commission of the offense."

Innocent Agency

In some cases, an individual may unwittingly become involved in the commission of a crime due to the actions of another person. This is known as innocent agency. If someone is used as a tool or instrument by the principal offender without their knowledge or consent, they are not considered liable for the offence as seen in the case of R v. Amadi (2005) 3 NWLR (Pt. 911) 215 and R v. Nasamu (1947), where it was held that an innocent person who is used as an instrument for committing a crime cannot be held liable.

Invalid Consideration

In criminal law, consideration refers to something of value exchanged in a contract or agreement. If the consideration for committing an offence is invalid or unlawful, it does not excuse the commission of the crime. Even if a person is promised something in return for their participation in criminal activity, they can still be held liable for their actions as seen in the case of R v. Anyaoha (2012) 8 NWLR (Pt. 1304) 1 and R v. Makanjuola (1963), where the court held that the invalidity of consideration does not absolve the aider and abettor from liability.

Minor Variation

Minor variation refers to situations where the primary offender deviates slightly from the intended crime. In such cases, the aider and abettor may still be held liable if the variation does not constitute a substantial departure from the agreed plan. This principle was highlighted in the case of R v. Bello (1964), where the court held that minor variations do not break the chain of counseling or procuring.

Break in the Chain of Counseling or Procuring:

A break in the chain of counseling or procuring

This occurs when there is a significant interruption or deviation from the original plan to commit the crime. If such a break occurs, the aider and abettor may not be held liable for subsequent offenses committed by the primary offender. This concept was discussed in the Nigerian case of R v. Adeleke (1971), where the court emphasized that a break in the chain of counseling or procuring relieves the aider and abettor from liability for further offenses beyond the break.

CLASSIFICATION OF CRIMES

TOPIC OF THE DAY

- DEFINITION OF CRIME

- CLASSIFICATION OF CRIME

- CLASSIFICATION OF CRIME BY ACTUS REUS

Definition of Crime

A crime refers to any act or omission that is prohibited by law and punishable by the state. It is essentially a breach of societal norms that are deemed significant enough to warrant legal consequences. In Nigeria, the primary sources of criminal law include the Criminal Code Act (applicable in the southern states) and the Penal Code Act (applicable in the northern states), as well as various other statutes and case law. See the case of R v. Igwilo (1961) NWLR (Pt. 73) 58 where the court held that for an act to be considered a crime, there must be both the guilty act (actus reus) and the guilty mind (mens rea).

Classification of Crime

Crimes can be classified in various ways, often based on their severity or the nature of the harm they cause. In Nigeria, crimes are commonly classified as either felonies or misdemeanors, with felonies being more serious offenses carrying harsher penalties, while misdemeanors are less severe offenses.See section 390 Criminal Code Act which defines felonies in Nigeria and prescribes penalties for such offenses. It categorizes offenses such as murder, robbery, and treason as felonies.

Classification of Crime by Actus Reus

Actus reus refers to the physical act or conduct that constitutes a criminal offense. Crimes can be further classified based on the nature of this act as follows;

1. Crimes of Commission: These are offenses where the accused actively engages in prohibited conduct. Examples include theft, assault, and murder.

2. Crimes of Omission: These are offenses where the accused fails to act when there is a legal duty to do so, resulting in harm or injury. For instance, failing to provide necessary care to a dependent child or elderly person could constitute a crime of omission. See the case of R v. Adetoro (1968) NMLR 84 which involved a charge of manslaughter due to the defendant's failure to act. The court ruled that the accused had a duty of care towards the victim and their failure to act resulted in the victim's death, establishing the actus reus for the offense.

3. Crimes of Possession: These are offenses where the accused is in possession of something illegal, such as illicit drugs or stolen property, with the knowledge of its illegal nature. See section 427, Criminal Code Act which addresses offenses related to possession of stolen property in Nigeria and prescribes penalties for such crimes.

GENERAL PRINCIPLES OF CRIMINAL RESPONSIBILITY

TOPIC OF THE DAY

- INTENTION/MOTIVE

- MISTAKE

- CORPORATION

- HUSBAND AND WIFE

- EXEMPTION FROM CRIMINAL RESPONSIBILITY

- COMPULSION/COERCION

- BONAFIDE CLAIM OF RIGHT

- INTOXICATION

- INSANITY AND IMMATURITY

- PROVOCATION

- NECESSITY

- SELF DEFENCE

- DEFENCE OF ANOTHER PERSON

- DEFENCE OF PROPERTY

Intention/Motive

Intention refers to the mental state of the accused at the time of committing the crime. It implies that the accused person meant to commit the act and was aware of its consequences while motive, on the other hand, is the reason behind committing the crime. While motive may be relevant in understanding the context of a crime, it is not essential for establishing criminal liability. See section 7 of the Criminal Code Act which provides that "a person who does an act with intent to cause the consequences which constitute the crime is deemed to have intended to cause those consequences, though the person did not actually foresee them." See the case of R v. Gusau (1962) NMLR 191 where the accused aimed his gun at the victim and shot, indicating clear intention to cause harm.

Mistake

Mistake of fact can be a defense if it negates the required mental state for the offense. For instance, if someone honestly and reasonably believes they are acting in self-defense, they may not have the requisite intent for a murder charge. However, mistake of law is generally not a defense in Nigerian criminal law. See section 24 of the Criminal Code Act provides for mistake of fact as a defense and the case of R v. Igbo (1963) NMLR 122 where the accused mistakenly believed the victim was an armed robber and acted in self-defense.

Corporation

Corporations can be held criminally liable for offenses committed by their agents or employees during the course of their employment and in furtherance of the corporation's interests see section 66 of the Criminal Code Act which states that "every person shall be liable to punishment under this Code for every act or omission contrary to the provisions thereof, of which the person shall be guilty within Nigeria." See the case of A.G. Lagos State v. Dosunmu (1989) 3 NWLR (Pt. 111) 552 where the court held that a corporation can be held liable for the criminal acts of its employees.

Husband and Wife

The legal principle of marital immunity historically protected spouses from being prosecuted for certain crimes committed against each other. However, this principle has been largely abolished in Nigerian law. See section 2 of the Violence Against Persons (Prohibition) Act, 2015, which criminalizes various forms of violence within domestic relationships, including spousal violence and the case of A.G. Lagos State v. Olaoluwa (2017) LPELR-43689(CA) where the court upheld the conviction of a husband for assaulting his wife, affirming the principle of gender equality in criminal law.

Exemption from Criminal Responsibility

Certain individuals may be exempted from criminal responsibility due to their official capacity, such as judges, legislators, or law enforcement officers acting within the scope of their duties. See section 308 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria which provides immunity from civil and criminal proceedings for the President, Vice President, Governors, and Deputy Governors and the case of A.G. Federation v. Alhaji Atiku Abubakar (2007) 4 NWLR (Pt. 1025) 459 where the court ruled on the extent of immunity granted to certain public officials under the Constitution.

Compulsion/Coercion

A person may be excused from criminal liability if they were compelled to commit an offense under duress or coercion, where their life or safety was threatened. See section 29 of the Criminal Code Act which provides for the defense of compulsion and the case of R v. Nasamu (1959) SCNLR 32 where the accused was threatened with death if he did not commit the crime, leading the court to recognize the defense of compulsion.

Bona Fide Claim of Right

A bona fide claim of right defense arises when a person honestly believes they have a legal right to the property or action in question, even if that belief is mistaken. See section 22 of the Criminal Code Act provides for this defense and the case Oseni v. The State (1988) 3 NWLR (Pt. 83) 506 where the accused genuinely believed the property was rightfully his, leading to the recognition of the defense of bona fide claim of right.

Intoxication

Voluntary intoxication is generally not a defense to criminal liability unless it prevents the accused from forming the required intent for the offense. See section 28 of the Criminal Code Act which provides that voluntary intoxication is not a defense and the case of R v. Nsofor (1964) 1 All NLR 124 where the accused's intoxication prevented him from forming the intent required for murder, leading to a reduced charge.

Insanity and Immaturity

Insanity or mental incapacity can be a defense if it prevents the accused from understanding the nature and consequences of their actions. See section 28 of the Criminal Code Act provides that insanity is a defense and the case of R v. Momodu (1990) 1 NWLR (Pt. 125) 139 where the accused was found not guilty by reason of insanity due to a diagnosed mental disorder. Immaturity, particularly in the case of minors, can also affect criminal responsibility, as they may not fully comprehend the consequences of their actions.

Provocation

Provocation refers to actions or words that cause someone to lose control of their emotions, leading them to commit a criminal act in the heat of the moment. In Nigeria, the Criminal Code Act (CCA) and the Penal Code Act (PCA) provide guidance on provocation. See section 283 of the CCA and Section 222 of the PCA state that provocation can reduce a charge of murder to manslaughter if it can be proven that the accused acted in the heat of passion caused by sudden provocation. See the case of In R v. Mba (1976), where the Nigerian court held that provocation must be such that it would make a reasonable person momentarily lose self-control. 

Necessity

Necessity refers to situations where a person commits a criminal act to prevent a greater harm or evil. The Nigerian law recognizes the defense of necessity under certain circumstances. See section 23 of the Criminal Code Act states that conduct which would otherwise constitute an offense can be justified if it was necessary to avoid a greater harm. See the case of R v. Odu (1963), where the Nigerian court held that necessity can be a valid defense if the accused acted to prevent a greater harm and had no reasonable alternative.

Self-Defence

Self-defence refers to the right to protect oneself from harm when faced with imminent danger. See sections 33 and 34 of the Criminal Code Act and Sections 59 and 60 of the Penal Code Act which recognize self-defence as a valid defense to a criminal charge. The force used must be proportionate to the threat faced. See the case of Abodundu v. The State (2010), where the Nigerian Court of Appeal held that self-defence is justifiable if the accused reasonably believed that the force used was necessary to protect themselves from imminent harm.

Defence of Another Person

Defence of another person refers to the right to use force to protect someone else from harm. The Nigerian law recognizes the defense of another person under Sections 34 and 35 of the Criminal Code Act and Sections 60 and 61 of the Penal Code Act. The force used must be reasonable and proportionate to the threat faced by the person being defended. See the case of R v. Balogun (1959), where the Nigerian court held that a person can use force to defend another if they reasonably believe that the other person is in imminent danger of harm.

Defence of Property

Defence of property refers to the right to use reasonable force to protect one's property from damage or theft. See section 31 of the Criminal Code Act and Section 76 of the Penal Code Act allow for the defence of property. However, the force used must be reasonable and proportionate to the threat posed to the property as in the case of Ewumi v. The State (2013), where the Nigerian Court of Appeal emphasized that while a person has the right to defend their property, the force used must not be excessive.

ELEMENTS OF AN OFFENCE: ACTUS REUS

TOPIC OF THE DAY

- DESCRIPTION OF ACTUS REUS

- IDENTIFYING ACTUS REUS

- OMISSION

The Elements of an Offense: Actus Reus

In the Nigerian legal system, understanding the elements of an offense is crucial for establishing guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Actus reus, a fundamental principle, refers to the physical act or conduct that constitutes a crime. See the Criminal Code Act, Cap C38, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria 2004 which contains provisions defining various offenses and their elements and the Penal Code Act, Cap P3, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria 2004 which is similar to the Criminal Code Act and applies to offenses in Northern Nigeria.

Description of Actus Reus

Actus reus encompasses a wide range of physical acts or conduct that constitutes a crime. It can include actions, threats, or even failure to act (omission) where there's a legal duty to act. For instance, See the case of R v. Oladipo (1956) NWLR 220, where the defendant's act of stealing a car constituted the actus reus of theft.

Identifying Actus Reus

Identifying actus reus involves proving that the accused committed the physical act or conduct prohibited by law. This often requires evidence establishing a causal link between the defendant's actions and the harm caused. See the case of State v. Okoro (2005) 13 NWLR (Pt. 940) 396, where the court held that the actus reus of murder was established through evidence showing the defendant's actions directly caused the victim's death.

Omission

Omission refers to the failure to act when there's a legal duty to do so, resulting in harm to another person or society. This duty to act may arise from a statutory obligation, contractual duty, or a special relationship between the parties. For example, see the case of R v. Izu (1999) 7 NWLR (Pt. 611) 552, where the court found the defendant guilty of manslaughter due to his failure to provide medical assistance to a person in distress, despite having a duty to do so as a medical practitioner.

ELEMENTS OF AN OFFENCE: MENS REA

TOPIC OF THE DAY

- THE DEFINITION OF MENS REA

- THE PRINCIPLE OF LAW

- INTENTION

- KNOWLEDGE

- RECKLESSNESS

- NEGLIGENCE

- MALICE

Mens Rea

"Mens rea" is a Latin term meaning "guilty mind." It's a fundamental principle in criminal law that refers to the mental state or intention of the accused when committing a crime. In Nigeria, mens rea is crucial in determining criminal liability. See section 24 of the Criminal Code Act which defines mens rea as "intention, knowledge, or recklessness." 

The Principle of Law

The principle of law holds that for an accused to be found guilty of a crime, there must be proof beyond a reasonable doubt of both the actus reus (the guilty act) and mens rea (the guilty mind). This principle ensures that individuals are not unjustly convicted based solely on their actions without considering their mental state.

Intention

Intention refers to a deliberate decision to engage in conduct or achieve a particular result. See the case of R v. Ijomah (1965) NMLR 251, where the court held that intention exists when the accused acts with a clear purpose, aiming to bring about the prohibited consequence.

Knowledge

Knowledge implies awareness or understanding of certain facts or circumstances. An accused has knowledge if they are aware that their actions will likely lead to a particular result. See the case of R v. Esso West Africa (1965) NMLR 73, where the court emphasized that knowledge can be inferred from the circumstances surrounding the offense.

Recklessness

Recklessness involves consciously disregarding a substantial and unjustifiable risk that a particular result will occur. See the case of R v. Adeolu (1995) 6 NWLR (Pt. 404) 684, where the court stated that recklessness arises when an accused person proceeds with their actions despite knowing the potential harm they may cause.

Negligence

Negligence refers to a failure to exercise the level of care that a reasonable person would exercise in similar circumstances. See the case of R v. Lawrence (1982) 2 NWLR (Pt. 24) 627, where the court established that negligence involves a lack of foresight or failure to anticipate the consequences of one's actions.

Malice

Malice denotes ill will or wrongful intention towards another person. It can be express (directly stated) or implied (inferred from the circumstances). See the case of R v. Chukwudifu (1965) NMLR 78, where the court held that malice exists when the accused acts with the intention to cause harm or injury.

HISTORY AND SOURCES OF NIGERIAN CRIMINAL LAW

History of Nigerian Criminal Law

Pre-Colonial Era

Traditional African societies in what is now Nigeria had customary laws governing various aspects of life, including crime and punishment. Crimes were often dealt with through community-based justice systems, with chiefs and elders adjudicating disputes and meting out punishments.

Colonial Era

The introduction of British colonial rule in Nigeria brought about significant changes to the legal system, including criminal law and the British common law principles were gradually imposed and integrated with existing customary laws.

Post-Independence

Nigeria gained independence in 1960, leading to the development of its own legal system, including criminal law and The Nigerian legal system is a blend of English common law, customary law, and Islamic law (in the northern regions).

Sources of Nigerian Criminal Law

1. Constitution of Nigeria

The Nigerian Constitution serves as the supreme law of the land and provides the framework for criminal law and justice and it outlines fundamental rights, including the right to a fair trial and protection against arbitrary arrest and detention.

2. Criminal Code Act

The Criminal Code Act is a federal statute that applies to the southern states of Nigeria and it codifies various criminal offenses and their penalties. Notable provisions include those on homicide (Section 319), theft (Section 383), and assault (Section 351).

3. Penal Code

The Penal Code applies to the northern states of Nigeria and is based on Islamic law principles. It covers offenses such as theft, adultery, and alcohol-related crimes. Notable provisions include those on theft (Section 287), adultery (Section 387), and homicide (Section 220).

4. Case Law

Judicial decisions play a crucial role in shaping Nigerian criminal law where notable cases set precedents and clarify legal principles. See the case of R v. Babatunde Olanrewaju, where the court established principles of self-defense in Nigerian criminal law.

5. Sharia Law

In some northern states, Sharia law coexists with the Penal Code and applies to Muslims in matters such as family law and certain criminal offenses where the Sharia courts handle cases involving offenses like adultery, theft, and alcohol consumption.

THE CONTENT OF CRIME

TOPIC OF THE DAY

- COMMON LAW

- PUBLIC LAW

- MENS REA

- ACT OR COMMISSION

- STRICT AND ABSOLUTE LIABILITY OFFENCES

Common Law

Common law refers to legal principles and precedents developed through judicial decisions rather than through statutes or regulations. It's based on customary practices and past judicial decisions.

While Nigeria primarily operates under a statutory legal system, the common law is still relevant, especially in areas not covered by statutes or where judicial interpretation is required. See the case of Balogun v Odutola (1953) 14 WACA 85 where the Nigerian case illustrates the application of common law principles in contract law.

Public Law

Public law deals with the relationship between individuals and the government, including areas such as constitutional law, administrative law, and criminal law.

Public law governs the powers and duties of government institutions, the rights of citizens, and the regulation of public affairs in Nigeria. An example is The Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended) which outlines the framework for public law in Nigeria.

Mens Rea

Mens rea, Latin for "guilty mind," refers to the mental state or intention behind a criminal act. It's a crucial element in determining criminal liability.

Nigerian criminal law requires proof of mens rea for most offenses to secure a conviction. See the case of R v. Momoh (1965) 1 All NLR 256 which discusses the importance of establishing mens rea in criminal prosecutions.

Act or Commission

Act or commission refers to both positive actions and omissions that can result in legal consequences.

Nigerian law recognizes liability for both acts and omissions, depending on the circumstances and legal requirements. See Section 23 of the Criminal Code Act which outlines circumstances where omissions can constitute criminal offenses.

Strict and Absolute Liability Offenses

Strict liability offenses impose liability without requiring proof of mens rea, while absolute liability offenses impose liability regardless of fault.

Nigerian law recognizes strict and absolute liability offenses in various statutes, particularly in regulatory and public safety matters. See the case of Akpan v. The State (2011) LPELR-4243(SC) where the Supreme Court discusses the distinction between strict and absolute liability offenses in criminal law.

GENERAL INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE OF CRIMINAL LAW

TOPIC OF THE DAY

- CRIME

- RUNNING OFFENCES

- THE CRIMINAL CODE

- PURPOSE OF CRIMINAL LAW

- DYNAMISM OF THE CRIMINAL LAW

CRIME

Crime refers to any act or omission that violates the laws of a particular jurisdiction and is punishable by that jurisdiction's legal system. It encompasses a wide range of activities, from minor offenses like traffic violations to serious crimes such as murder and robbery. In Nigeria, criminal offenses are governed by various statutes, including the Criminal Code Act and the Penal Code Act, depending on the region.

Elements of a Crime:

1. Actus Reus: The physical act or omission that constitutes the offense.

2. Mens Rea: The mental state or intent behind the act.

3. Causation: The link between the act and its consequences.

RUNNING OFFENCES

Running offenses, also known as continuing offenses, are offenses that are ongoing or continuous in nature. These offenses are not completed in a single act but continue over a period of time. Examples include drug trafficking, human trafficking, and certain types of fraud. See the case of Federal Republic of Nigeria v. Ndukwe & Ors (2017) LPELR-42061(SC) where the Supreme Court of Nigeria held that drug trafficking can be considered a running offense because it involves ongoing activities rather than a single isolated act.

THE CRIMINAL CODE

The Criminal Code Act is a statute that codifies criminal offenses and their punishments in Nigeria. It applies to the southern states of Nigeria, while the Penal Code Act applies to the northern states. The Criminal Code Act contains provisions on various offenses, defenses, and procedures relating to criminal matters. Examples are Section 316 which defines the offense of murder and prescribes its punishment, Section 390 which deals with the offense of theft and its penalties and Section 419 which addresses the offense of obtaining by false pretenses (commonly known as 419 fraud).

PURPOSE OF CRIMINAL LAW

The primary purpose of criminal law is to maintain social order, protect public safety, and uphold justice within society. It serves several key functions which includes;

1. Deterrence: this is by imposing penalties on offenders to deter individuals from committing crimes.

2. Punishment: this is where offenders are punished proportionally to the severity of their crimes as a form of retribution and to discourage future misconduct.

3. Rehabilitation: this is where it seeks to rehabilitate offenders through programs aimed at reforming their behavior and reintegrating them into society.

4. Protection: this is where it protects individuals and communities from harm by enforcing laws that prohibit certain behaviors.

5. Restitution: this is where offenders may be required to compensate victims for their losses or injuries.

DYNAMISM OF CRIMINAL LAW

The field of criminal law is dynamic and constantly evolving to adapt to changing societal values, technological advancements, and legal interpretations. See the case of State v. Awolowo (1963) 1 All NLR 178 where the Nigerian judiciary played a pivotal role in interpreting and expanding the scope of criminal liability, demonstrating the dynamism of criminal law in response to societal changes and legal challenges. This dynamism is evident in the following aspects:

1. Legislative Reforms: this is where lawmakers periodically amend criminal statutes to address emerging issues and improve the effectiveness of the legal system.

2. Judicial Precedents: this is where the courts interpret and apply existing laws to new situations, shaping the development of legal principles and doctrines.

3. Social Changes: this is where the changes in societal norms and attitudes influence the perception of certain behaviors as criminal offenses, leading to shifts in legal frameworks.

4. Technological Advances: this is where the proliferation of technology presents new challenges for law enforcement and requires updates to existing laws to address cybercrimes and digital evidence.