Sumanya Issah Torri V. The National Park Service of Nigeria (2008)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report

OYEBISI F. OMOLEYE, J.C.A.

In the High Court of Niger State, holden at New Bussa, the Appellant was charged on a three-count information as follows:

“1. that you Sumanya Issah Torri did commit illegal entry to wit: You entered into Shaffini area of the Kainji Lake National Park within the New Bussa Judicial Division on the 31st day of March, 2004 at about 5: 30 p.m. And that you thereby committed an offence contrary to Section 30(1) of the National Park Service Act No. 46 of 1999 and punishable under Section 38 (1) of the same Act.

2. That you Sumanya Issah Torri did commit illegal hunting and killing of animals to wit: you hunted and killed animals that is, western Heartbeast, Jackal and tooth of warthog in Shaffini area of the Kainji Lake National Park within the New Bussa Judicial Division on the 31st day of March 2004 at about 5:30 p. m. And that you thereby committed an offence contrary to Section 31(1) (a) of the National Park Service Act No. 46 of 1999 and punishable under Section 38(2) (a) of the same Act.
3. That you Summanya Issah Torri did commit illegal possession of weapons to wit: You were in possession of a done gun, a cutlass and a knife in Shaffini area of the Kainji Lake National Park within the New Bussa Judicial Division on the 3rd day of March, 2004 at about 5:30 p.m. And that you thereby committed an offence contrary to Section 32(1) of the National Park Service Act. No. 46 of 1999 and punishable under Section 38(3) of the same Act. ”

In the trial Court Coram C. 1.Auta J., the Appellant was arraigned. He pleaded guilty to the charge, was convicted and sentenced to a cumulative term of nine years imprisonment on 5/1/04.

Being dissatisfied with the judgment, the Appellant was compelled to appeal to this Court.

The Appellant filed a Notice and Grounds of Appeal which was deemed properly filed and served on 5/10/06. The said Notice and Grounds of Appeal containing seven grounds of appeal with their particulars are at pages 8 to 11 of the record of appeal.

Both sides filed and exchanged briefs of argument as provided by the Rules of this Court.

The briefs were adopted by the learned counsel for both parties at the hearing of this appeal on the 24th of January, 2008.

Learned counsel for the Appellant, Mr. Chukwuma-Machukwu Ume urged this Court to allow this appeal, quash the trial and acquit the Appellant.

Replying, Mr. F. A. Bebu learned counsel for the Respondent urged this Court to dismiss the appeal, affirm the judgment of the trial Court, and confirm the conviction and sentence of the Appellant.

In the Appellant’s brief of argument which was filed on 16/11/06, six issues were distilled from the seven grounds of appeal by the Appellant’s learned counsel for the determination of this appeal. They are:

1. Whether the trial Court was right to have assumed jurisdiction and allowed the prosecution counsel to institute and prosecute this action without the consent of the Attorney-General of the Federation as required under Section 41 (1) of National Park Service of Nigeria?
2. Whether the trial Court was right to have granted leave to the Respondent to prefer a charge against the Appellant considering the requirements of the law on application to prefer a charge and the circumstances under which it was granted?
3. Whether the Appellant had a fair hearing considering the manner of his trial and conviction?
4. Whether the trial Court was right to have convicted the Appellant solely on his plea of guilty to the offence charged without calling on prosecution to prove its case,?
5. Whether the trial Court was right in convicting the Appellant by relying on the prosecution counsel’s statement without evidence before the court?
6. Whether there was evidence before the Court to support the conviction and sentencing of the Appellant for an offence under Section 30(1) 31(1) (a), and 32(1) of the National Park Service Decree No.46 of 1999?

The learned counsel for the Respondent in the Respondent’s brief of argument which was deemed filed on 13/3/07 adopted issues one, two, three, four and six formulated by the Appellant in the Appellant’s brief of argument for the resolution of the appeal. The said issues have been reproduced supra.

The Court of Appeal is free to adopt the issues formulated by parties or even formulate issues which it considers appropriate for the determination of the real complaints in an appeal. See the cases of:

(1) Ikegwuoha V. Ohawuehi (1996) 3 NWLR (Pt. 435) p, 146 and