Inside Nigerian Criminal Law: Rights, Duties & Consequences
Understanding Core Criminal Law Principles in Nigeria
IN Nigeria’s criminal justice system, public misunderstanding of basic legal principles often leads to rights violations, wrongful arrests, and avoidable convictions. While laws clearly define what law enforcement agencies can and cannot do, ignorance—on both sides—continues to undermine justice. Four frequently asked questions reveal critical safeguards embedded in Nigerian criminal law.
Arrest in Lieu: An Unconstitutional Practice
One recurring concern is whether the police can arrest a person in place of a suspect—a practice commonly referred to as “arrest in lieu.” Nigerian law unequivocally prohibits this.
Arrest in lieu occurs when law enforcement detains a relative, spouse, or associate of a suspect to compel the suspect to surrender. Section 7 of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA) 2015 expressly forbids this practice, declaring that no individual may be arrested for an offence they did not personally commit.
Courts have consistently held that arrest in lieu violates constitutional rights to personal liberty and dignity. Any officer engaging in such conduct exposes the state to civil liability and disciplinary sanctions.
Buying or Possessing Stolen Property: Criminal Liability Explained
Another area often misunderstood concerns the purchase or possession of stolen property. Under Section 427 of the Criminal Code, anyone who knowingly receives, buys, or retains stolen goods commits an offence.
Importantly, liability does not depend solely on actual knowledge. The law applies an objective standard: if circumstances suggest that a reasonable person would have suspected the goods were stolen—such as unusually low prices or secretive transactions—the buyer may still be criminally liable.
This provision serves as a deterrent against indirect participation in crime by discouraging markets for stolen goods.
The “Last Seen Rule” and Circumstantial Evidence
The “last seen rule” is a judicial principle applied in homicide cases where direct evidence is unavailable. If a deceased person was last seen alive in the company of another individual and later found dead, the court may presume that the person last seen bears responsibility.
This presumption is not automatic guilt. Rather, it shifts the evidential burden to the accused to provide a credible explanation of events leading to the separation. Failure to do so may strengthen the prosecution’s case through circumstantial evidence.
Confessions and the Rule of Voluntariness
Confessional statements remain powerful evidence, but Nigerian law strictly regulates their admissibility. Section 29 of the Evidence Act 2011 provides that any confession obtained through torture, threats, inducement, or coercion is inadmissible.
Where voluntariness is disputed, courts conduct a trial-within-trial to determine whether the confession was freely made. This safeguard reflects Nigeria’s commitment to due process and the prohibition of inhumane treatment.
Conclusion
These legal principles underscore a central truth: Nigeria’s laws provide robust protections, but their effectiveness depends on public awareness and enforcement. Legal literacy remains essential for safeguarding rights and strengthening justice.
