Philemon Reuben v. The Federal Republic of Nigeria (2023)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report – COURT OF APPEAL

ITA GEORGE MBABA, JCA (Delivering the leading judgment)

Appellant filed this appeal against the decision of the Federal High Court in Charge No. FHC/KN/CR/61/2021 delivered on 19th November, 2021, by Hon. Justice J.E. Inyang, wherein the learned trial Judge convicted the appellant and sentenced him to 15 years imprisonment, without the option of fine, for offence of trafficking in 340 Kilograms of Canabis Sativa, a narcotic drug similar to Cocaine Heroin and LSD, contrary to and punishable under section 11(b) of the National Drug Law Enforcement Agency Act, Cap No. 30, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 2004.

At the trial court, appellant was charged, as follows, as per the amended Charge:

That you PHILEMON REUBEN, male, adult, 26 years old, on or about the 1st day of April, 2021 at Tokarawa Village, Kano State within the jurisdiction of this honourable court, without lawful authority, trafficked in 340 Kilograms of Cannabis Sativa, a narcotic drug similar to cocaine heroin and LSD and thereby committed an offence contrary to and punishable under section 11(b) of the National Drug Law Enforcement Agency Act, Cap No. 30, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 2004.

The amended charge was read to the appellant (as accused person or defendant) in English language on 25/6/2021 and he appeared to understand the same and pleaded guilty. At the trial, the prosecution called witnesses and the appellant admitted the commission of the offence. And after considering the evidence and addresses of counsel, the trial court held:

The court has inquired of the defendant whether his plea of guilt is as to the facts as reviewed by the prosecution. He has responded in the affirmative, but adds that exhibit A to which he admitted ownership do not weigh not (sic) 340 kilograms.

It does not lie in the month of the defendant at this stage, having pleaded guilty to the offence preferred against him, to complain about the weight of the six sacks of cannabis sativa contained therein having signed and thumb printed the exhibit forms.

The issue is that he admits the offence was committed by him, the mathematical precision of the weight of the cannabis is not in issue. It is trite law that a plea of guilt is superior in the hierarchy of evidence. It is an admission by the defendant of the totality of the ingredient of the offence charged. There is no onerous burden placed on the shoulders of the prosecution to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt.

A fortiori, when the court is satisfied with the voluntariness of the defendant to unequivocally plead guilty to the charge preferred against him (sic) See Omoju v. FRN (2008) MJSC 156 at 174, Timothy v. FRN (2012) 46 WRN 1; (2012) LPELR-9346 (SC), Baalo v. FRN (2016) 38 WRN 144; (2016) LPELR-40500 SC.

Indeed, once the court is satisfied that the defendant intends to admit the truth of all for which he has pleaded guilty, the court shall proceed to summarily convict and sentence the defendant. See sections 274(2) and 356(2) of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act, 2015.

I have duly considered the plea of guilt by the defendant, his further admission of guilt as to the review of facts presented by the prosecution with regards to the offence in the charge preferred against the defendant, the evidence adduced by the prosecution in its review of facts, and proceed, without hesitation, to find the defendant guilty as charged. See pages 40 – 41 of the records of appeal.

Appellant was sentenced to 15 years imprisonment, from the date of his arrest and detention, without option of fine.

That is the judgment appellant appealed against, as per the notice and grounds of appeal, on pages 43 – 53 of the records of appeal, disclosing 9 grounds of appeal. Appellant filed his brief of arguments on 29/4/2022 and distilled six (6) issues for the determination of the appeal, namely:

(1) Whether the trial Judge was right when she convicted the appellant based on the amended charge filed on the 25th October, 2021, when the facts, as received by the prosecution, did not prove the alleged offence against the appellant and his plea of guilt cannot be safely relied upon by the trial court to convict the appellant. (Grounds 1 and 2)