Alhaji Prince Farounbi Kareem Vs The Federal Republic Of Nigeria (2002)

LAWGLOBAL HUB Lead Judgment Report

O. EJIWUNMI, J.S.C. 

In this appeal, issue with regard to the procedure for prosecution of accused persons, who in the course of the trial changed their plea by withdrawing pleas of not guilty and substituting thereof, the plea of guilty, would be considered. Also, whether the prosecution ought to have called such persons, who were co-accused, to give evidence in support of the case for the prosecution against the remaining accused person. And also whether an accused person may be convicted upon his confessional statement made during the investigation of the case.

I shall now state briefly the facts that gave rise to this appeal. The appellant in the instant appeal was primarily charged with three other accused persons, namely, Oluwole Korede Lawal, Alhaji Mufutau Idris Atanda and Tunde Sosanya before the Miscellaneous Offences Tribunal sitting in Lagos on the 9th day of December, 1994. They were variously charged with dealing and selling heroin and for being in possession of Indian hemp, otherwise known as cannabis sativa, without lawful authority and thereby committed offences punishable under section 10(c) of the National Drug Law Enforcement Agency Decree No. 48 of 1989.

However, during the trial, the accused, Oluwole Korede Lawal, sought the leave of the Tribunal to change his plea to that of guilty. Whereupon, on the 19th September, 1995, the charge against him was read to him and after the explanation, he pleaded guilty to the charge. The summary of the facts that gave rise to the charge was read to his hearing before the Tribunal. Thereafter, the learned presiding Judge of the Tribunal sentenced him, as he thought fit. And as the trial of the other accused progressed further, the 3rd and 4th accused, namely, Alhaji Mufutau Idris Atanda and Tunde Sosanya sought the leave of the Tribunal to change their plea. Having granted the leave, the Judge of the Tribunal then caused the charge as relevant to be read to them, to which they pleaded guilty. Thereafter they were sentenced after the summary of the facts as relevant to the said charge were read to the Tribunal as deemed appropriate by the Judge of the Tribunal on the 12th of January 1998.

The prosecution then continued with the trial of the appellant alone upon the following charge, and which reads:

Count One: –

‘That You Alhaji Prince Farounbi Kareem (m), Alhaji Mufutau Idris Atanda (m) and Tunde Sosanya (m) on or about the 22nd day of March, 1994, at No.1 Amoo Farounbi Drive, Isolo, Lagos dealt in 467 grammes of heroin by selling same to one Oluwole Korede Lawal and thereby committed an offence punishable under section 10(c) of the National Drug Law Enforcement Agency Decree No. 48 of 1989″.

Count Two:-

‘That you Alhaji Prince Farounbi Kareem (m) on or about the 23rd day of March, 1994, at No.1 Amoo Farounbi Drive Isolo, Lagos dealt in 2.5 kilogrammes of Indian hemp otherwise known as cannabis sativa drug similar to cocaine, LSD or heroin without lawful authority and thereby committed an offence punishable under section 10(c) of the National Drug Law Enforcement Agency Decree No. 48 of 1989″

Evidence in support of the case for the prosecution was given by six witnesses. Also tendered and admitted were 52 exhibits, which consisted of various documents and other objects to show what formed the basis of the case for the prosecution.

The appellant also gave evidence and called a witness. The case for the prosecution from the evidence given by P.W.4, Yinka Fatoba had as its starting point, the Murtala Mohammed International Airport Ikeja., Lagos on the 22nd day of March, 1994. On that day, P.W.4 was on duty at the airport, in the course of his duties as a civil servant and staff of the National Drug Law Enforcement Agency, which I would henceforth refer to simply as N.D.L.E.A. It was while there that he noticed Korede Lawal during the outward clearance of Air Afrique flight no. RK126 from Lagos to the United States of America. While the passengers were boarding the flight, Korede Lawal also joined them to board the flight. It was at this stage that P.W.4 demanded the travelling documents of Korede Lawal as P.W.4 suspected that he might be carrying hard drugs. Korede Lawal duly handed over his travelling documents to P.W.4.

Thereafter, P.W.4 took him to the office of the N.D.L.E.A. for x-ray examination. In their office as Korede Lawal confessed that he had swallowed hard drugs, P.W.4 then handed him over to two of their officers. P.W.4 further testified that after a body search was conducted on Korede Lawal, 13 wrappings of substance suspected to be hard drugs were found in his canvass shoes. All these suspected drugs with the canvass shoes were variously packed in special pouches by the officials of the N.D.L.E.A. who took part in the operation. Korede Lawal thereafter signed as the owner of the pouches in the form for that purpose. The other officers of the N.D.L.E.A. who took part in the operation also signed, forms requesting for scientific analysis were also signed by Korede Lawal after the pouches containing the suspected hard drugs were before then packed in the presence of Korede Lawal, and these included his canvass shoes. The travelling documents obtained from Korede Lawal were also kept in the custody of the N.D.L.E.A. and were later tendered and admitted as exhibits during the trial.

All the pouches which contained the suspected hard drugs were parked separately and taken by officials of the N.D.L.E.A. to the forensic laboratory at Oshodi on the following dates; 29th March 1994; 20th April 1994 with the forms duly filled and signed with which requests were made to the forensic analysts to determine the kind and nature of the suspected hard drug which included those found with Korede Lawal and others discovered in the course of their investigation by N.D.L.E.A. officials. The forensic analyst who received the various parcels containing the suspected hard drug was Miss Gloria Bassey. She gave evidence at the trial and told the court that she duly examined the various parcels of hard drugs forwarded to her. After she had finished with their examination, she prepared reports on them and she thereafter re-parcelled the various drug and forwarded them with her report to the N.D.L.E.A. In the course of her evidence, she tendered and it was admitted in evidence, the report and scientific aid form which accompanied the exhibit to the laboratory as exhibits (1) and (2). Also tendered and admitted in evidence as exhibit 3 is the parcel, the contents of which she had earlier analysed to be cannabis sativa, popularly known as Indian hemp.

The scientific analyst, next gave evidence about the five sets of exhibits which were forwarded to the forensic laboratory on the 20th of April, 1994, but which were handed over to her on the 29th of April, 1994 for analysis. For this purpose she identified to the court the endorsed form for scientific analysis. She then stated that as a result of her analysis of them she came to the conclusion that the exhibits contained heroin. After she had formed that view, she re-parcelled the exhibits, sealed them and wrote her report accordingly. She then forwarded the report and the exhibits to the N.D.L.E.A. The report was admitted as exhibit 5, while the request for scientific aid forms which accompanied the exhibits to forensic science laboratory were admitted as exhibits “6-11”. The large brown envelope in five transparent pouches was admitted as exhibit 11.The five transparent pouches themselves were admitted without objection as exhibits 12-16.