The Federal Republic Of Nigeria V. Ya’u Mohammed (2014)

LAWGLOBAL HUB Lead Judgment Report

KUDIRAT MOTONMORI OLATOKUNBO KEKERE-EKUN, J.S.C.

This is an appeal against the judgment of the Court of Appeal, Port Harcourt Division (the Lower Court) delivered on 6th December, 2012 setting aside the conviction and sentence of the respondent by the Federal High Court, Port Harcourt Division (the trial court) in its judgment delivered on 17th December 2008.

The respondent herein was arraigned before the trial court on a one-count charge of unlawful possession of 8 kilograms 0f Indian Hemp, otherwise known as cannabis sativa, On 22/10/2008 when he was first arraigned, his plea could not be taken, as he did not understand the language of the court. The case was

adjourned to enable the prosecution secure the services of an interpreter to interpret the proceedings from English to Hausa language and vice versa. On 1/12/08, an interpreter was available and his plea was taken. The learned trial Judge made the following record:

“PLEA OF THE ACCUSED

Charge read to accused person and interpreted from English to Hausa for the accused person who perfectly appeared to understand same. And pleaded guilty to the charge.”

Thereupon the prosecution summarily reviewed the facts of the case and tendered one exhibit, Exhibit A (the seized Indian Hemp). The respondent informed the court that Exhibit A did not belong to him but to his neighbor, one Dahiru Dan Mallam. The proceedings were adjourned to enable the prosecution produce the said neighbor. At the resumed hearing on 17/12/2008, no further mention was made of the neighbor. The prosecution tendered Exhibits B – F. The respondent admitted ownership of all the exhibits whereupon the prosecution called upon the court to convict the respondent. After considering the allocutus of the respondent, the court found him guilty as charged and sentenced him to 15 years imprisonment.

The respondent was dissatisfied with his conviction and sentence and appealed to the Lower Court. The Lower Court unanimously allowed the appeal and discharged and acquitted him. Dissatisfied with the discharge and acquittal of the respondent by the Lower Court, the appellant has appealed to this court vide its notice of appeal dated 5/1/2012 containing 8 grounds of appeal. It seeks the following reliefs:

(a) “An order allowing this appeal and affirming the conviction and sentence of the respondent by the trial court.

ALTERNATIVELY

(b) An order allowing this appeal and remitting this suit (sic) to the Chief Judge of the Federal High Court for reassigned to another judge of the Federal High Court, Port Harcourt Judicial Division for a retrial on the merits.”

In compliance with the rules of this court, the parties duly filed and exchanged their respective briefs of argument. At the hearing of the appeal on 19/12/2013, ANDREW IGBOEKWE ESQ., learned counsel for the appellant adopted and relied on the appellant brief filed on 30/5/2012 and urged the court to allow the appeal, set aside the judgment of the Lower Court and affirm the conviction and sentence imposed on the respondent by the trial court. TUDURU EDE ESQ., learned counsel for the respondent adopted and relied on the respondent’s brief filed on 26/6/2012 and urged the court to dismiss the appeal. The appellant formulated six issues for the determination of the appeal.

They are:

1. Whether from the facts and circumstances of this case, the Court of Appeal was right in holding that, in recording the plea of the respondent in the trial court, the learned trial judge did not comply with provision of S.218 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

(Grounds 1 & 2)