State V. Adu (2021) LLJR-SC

State V. Adu (2021)

LAWGLOBAL HUB Lead Judgment Report

EMMANUEL AKOMAYE AGIM, J.S.C.

The respondent was the Vice Chairman of the Task Force of the Youths Association of Amaorie Ozziza Community in Afikpo North L.G.A of Ebonyi State. On 18-9-2016, as such Vice chairman, he and other leaders of the taskforce directed and led members of the said Task Force of the Youths Association of the Amaorie Ozziza to go out and force youths in the community that had refused to attend the meeting of the Youths Association holding that day at the community playground, Armed with sticks, machetes and axe, singing war songs, they invaded the home of one Ali Agha to compel him to attend the said meeting. In the process of compelling him to follow them, they killed him by inflicting multiple machete cuts on his body resulting in acute loss of blood.

​Nine members of the group, including the respondent, were arrested by the police in connection with the incident. They were arraigned before the High Court of Ebonyi State, at Afikpo in Afikpo Judicial Division in criminal case No. HAF/24C/2017 on an amended one count charge of murder of Ali Agha contrary to Section 319(1) of the Criminal Code Law Cap. 33 Vol. 1 Laws of Ebonyi. The respondent was the 3rd accused.

Following conclusion of evidence and addresses by the prosecution and the defence, the trial Court rendered its judgment on 15-10-2018, holding inter alia that-

“The firm view of this Court is that all the accused persons in this charge are caught up by Section 7 of the Criminal Code Law Cap 33, vol. 1, Laws of Ebonyi State of Nigeria, 2009. ANIGBOGU V. UCHE JIGBO (2002) 10 NWLR (Pt. 776) page 472 at page 477 on need for local associations not to violate citizen’s rights to freedom of association, Court of Appeal held thus:

See also  Eze Ibeh Vs The State (1997) LLJR-SC

“Desirable as development project in the community may be, there must be precaution to ensure that the fundamental rights of individuals are not trampled upon by popular enthusiasm. These rights have been enshrined in the legislation, that is the constitutions, enjoy superiority over local custom, freedom of association and religion are all constitutional rights which ought to be respected”.

See also the case of Agbai v. Okogbue (1991) 1 NWLR (Pt. 204) 391.

The above authorities, it is evident that the movement of the youths to the house of the deceased in the manner in which it was carried out, was unconstitutional and was in the … a breach of the fundamental right of freedom of association of the deceased as stated by Section 40 of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended).

It is the law that where more than one person is accused of joint commission of crime as in the instant case, it is enough to prove that they all participated in the crime. What each did in furtherance of the commission of the crime is immaterial. The fact of the common intention manifesting in the execution of the common object is enough to render the accused persons guilty of the offence.

The Supreme Court in NWANKWOALA V. STATE (2006) 14 NWLR (pt. 1000) … at page 667 Ratio 3 – where on proof of common intention to commit crime, the Court intoned as follows: “where more than one person are accused of joint commission of a crime, it is enough to prove that they all participated in the crime. What each did in furtherance to the commission of the crime is immaterial. The mere fact of the common intention manifesting in the execution of the common object is enough to render each of the accused persons in the group guilty of the offence. ”

See also  Boniface Anyika & Company Lagos Nigeria Ltd. V. Katsina U. D. Uzor (2006) LLJR-SC

The Supreme Court in the same case at page 667 ratio 4, on joint liability for common action to commit crime the Supreme Court intoned as follows:

“Where common intention is established, a fatal blow or gunshot though given by any of the parties is deemed in the eyes of the law to have been given by all those present and participating. The person who actually delivered the fatal blow is, in that case, no more than the hand by which others also struck.”

Consequently, the firm view of this Court that based on the pieces of evidence of PW3, PW4, and PW5, it is all the accused persons in this charge that perpetrated the acts of inflicting the deceased with the machete cuts that abruptly sent the deceased to his maker.

The PW2 who is the medical practitioner gave evidence to the effect that the deceased Ali Agha had multiple injuries and bled from several blood vessels and most of these multiple witness were on the lateral part of the deceased which are used for defence.

Membership Required

You must be a member to access this content.

View Membership Levels

Already a member? Log in here

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *