John Timothy V. The Federal Republic Of Nigeria (2012)

LAWGLOBAL HUB Lead Judgment Report

BODE RHODES-VIVOUR, J.S.C.

On the 20th day of November, 2003 the appellant boarded a KLM plane at Amsterdam’s Schipol Airport. It was a direct flight to Nnamdi Azikiwe International Airport, Abuja. On arrival the appellant’s bag was searched by NDLEA officials at the Airport. Nothing was found on him. He was taken into the NDLEA office where he was ordered into the toilet. Therein, he moved his bowels and excreted well wrapped substances both subsequently found to be cocaine. The appellant wrote and signed two statements where he confirmed that the substances were cocaine. After a field test it was confirmed that the substances were cocaine. The substance was packed in his presence and sent to the National Drug Law Enforcement Agency (NDLEA), Drug Laboratory Ikoyi Lagos. A Drug Analysis Report was issued subsequently and the substance recovered from the appellant was confirmed to be cocaine.

The appellant was arrainged in the Federal High Court Abuja on a one count charge which read:

That you JOHN TIMOTHY (Male) on or about the 20th of November, 2003 at the Nnamdi Azikiwe International Airport, during the inward clearance of KLM flight No. KL 557 from Amsterdam imported 1.5 kilogrammes of cocaine a narcotic drug, without lawful authority and thereby committed an offence contrary to and punishable under section 10(a) of the National Drug Law Enforcement Agency Cap 253 Laws of the Federation 1990.

Nyako, J presided. On 17/12/03 the charge was read to the appellant and he pleaded not guilty. The respondent called a witness and tendered documents marked exhibits A, B, C, and D.

On 13th day of January, 2005, learned counsel for the appellant, Mrs Aidi informed the court that the appellant intends to change his plea. The charge was again read to the appellant, and he pleaded guilty to the charge. The learned trial judge concluded the hearing of the case in these words:

“In the light of the plea of guilty by the accused, the exhibit tendered and the statement of the accused person including also the recovered drug, I find the accused guilty as charged and by virtue of section 10 of the NDLEA Act convict him. He is accordingly sentence to a term of 4 years imprisonment from the date of his arrest considering the plea made by counsel…”

The appellant lodged an appeal. The Court of Appeal decided the appeal on the sole issue formulated by the respondent. The issue was similar to the only issue formulated by the appellant. It reads:

“Whether the learned trial judge was right in convicting the appellant based on his plea of guilty.”

In a considered judgment delivered on 21st day of May, 2007 the Court of Appeal confirmed the judgment of the High Court in these words:

“After a thorough consideration of the sole issue involved in this appeal, I resolve it in favour of the respondent. I find no just reason to interfere with the decision of the trial court. The appeal therefore lacks merit and it is dismissed accordingly. The judgment of the trial court is hereby affirmed. I also affirm the conviction and sentence of the appellant. ”

This appeal is against that judgment. In accordance with accepted practice and Rules of this court briefs were duly filed and exchanged. The appellant’s brief was filed on the 18th of June 2007, while the respondent’s brief was deemed filed on the 7th of May 2008.

Learned counsel for the appellant formulated three issues for determination. They read:

1. Whether the charge against the appellant was based on an existing law and whether he can be convicted on such.
2. Whether it can be said that the Exhibit tendered in court (cocaine) has been proved to be the same that was recovered from the appellant
3. Whether there exists strict compliance with the law when the appellant took his plea to the charge

Learned counsel for the respondent presented two issues for consideration. They are: