Warrant Officer Banni Yakubu V. Nigerian Army (2014)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report – COURT OF APPEAL

JOSEPH E. EKANEM, J.C.A. (Delivering the Leading Judgment)

This is an appeal against the judgment of the General Court Martial that sat at the Defence Headquarters, Mogadishu cantonment, Asokoro, Abuja and which tried the appellant along with another person for Conspiracy contrary to Section 517 of the Criminal Code Act, punishable under Section 114 of the Armed Forces Act Cap. A 20 Laws of the Federation of Nigeria 2004.

The appellant and his co-accused person pleaded not guilty to the charge’ on 20th day of December, 2007, the General Court Martial found the appellant and his co-accused guilty and in its sentence reduced the appellant in rank to a Corporal.

The case of the respondent against the appellant and his co-accused person is that in or about 2000, while acting as the Chief clerk of the Army Headquarters DOAA, the appellant along with his co-accused who was a member of the (Army) promotion Board 2006 conspired with two other persons in getting the two persons promoted knowing fully well that it is an offence to do so.

To prove its case, the respondent called one witness and tendered four exhibits. The appellant testified for himself, denying the charge and did not call any other witness. Counsel on both sides addressed the court and the judge – advocate did a summing up. Thereafter, the General Court Martial, as earlier stated, found the accused persons guilty as charged and passed sentence on them accordingly.

Dissatisfied with the turn of events, the appellant has appealed to this court by way of an amended notice of appeal after being granted an extension of time to appeal. The amended notice of appeal contains grounds of appeal.

In his brief of argument, the appellant formulated one issue for the court’s determination of the appeal. The issue is as follows:

“Whether having regard to the admissible evidence adduced, the court below was not in error when it refused to accept the appellant’s defence and whether the judgment can be supported having regard to the totality of the evidence.’

The issue is stated to be distilled from grounds one and five of the amended notice of appeal.

On the other hand, the respondent formulated the following issues for the determination of the appeal;

“A. Whether the appellant has not abandoned grounds 2 and 4 of his amended notice of appeal; considering that he did not formulate issue on them or ague them in his brief as a result of which this Honourable Court should discountenance.

B. Whether the appellant’s sole issue for the determination of this appeal; being of competent and incompetent grounds of appeal is not contrary to law as a result of which this Honourable Court should declare the appeal incompetent.

ALTERNATIVELY:

C. Whether in view of the evidence before the General Court Martial it was right in law to give the verdict of guilt against the Appellant by the Respondent.