CORAM

---

Cordelia Ifeoma Jombo-Ofo -Justice of the Court of Appeal

Usman Alhaji Musale- Justice of the Court of Appeal

Okon Efreti Abang -Justice of the Court of Appeal

---

PARTIES

---

CHIKA ODIONYE

APPELLANTS 

---

FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF NIGERIA

RESPONDENTS 

---

AREA(S) OF LAW

---

CRIMINAL LAW, EVIDENCE, SEXUAL OFFENCES, PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE, CONSTITUTIONAL LAW

 

---

SUMMARY OF FACTS

The Appellant was charged with four counts of sexual offenses against two minors (aged 7 and 8 years) under the Violence Against Persons (Prohibition) Act, 2015. After trial, during which the prosecution called 5 witnesses and the defense called 5 witnesses, the trial court convicted the Appellant on all counts and sentenced him to 1 year imprisonment on counts 1 and 2, and life imprisonment on counts 3 and 4. The Appellant appealed against his conviction.

 

---

HELD

---

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal and affirmed both conviction and sentence. The Court held that:

1. The prosecution proved its case beyond reasonable doubt through direct evidence of the victims and corroborating medical evidence.

2. The evidence of PW2 and PW5, though not eye witnesses, constituted valid corroborative evidence rather than inadmissible hearsay.

3. The trial court properly evaluated all evidence, including defense evidence alleging prior abuse by another person.

4. The victims’ evidence as minors required no corroboration, though corroboration was present.

 

---

ISSUES

---

1. Whether the prosecution proved the offenses beyond reasonable doubt considering the doubt allegedly established by the appellant?

2. Whether the trial Court was right to convict based on alleged hearsay evidence from PW2 and PW5?

3. Whether the trial Court gave fair consideration and evaluation to the evidence adduced by the appellant and his witnesses?

 

---

RATIONES DECIDENDI

---

STANDARD OF PROOF IN CRIMINAL CASES – MEANING OF PROOF BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT

---

“Proof beyond reasonable doubt is not proof beyond a shadow of doubt. Rather what is asked for is that the evidence produced by the prosecution before the Court is so strong, convincing and persuasive against the accused that no reasonable man would doubt the probability that the accused committed the offence.” – Per Cordelia Ifeoma Jombo-Ofo, J.C.A.

 

---

CORROBORATION IN SEXUAL OFFENCES – REQUIREMENT FOR CORROBORATION

---

“In a case of rape, the law is clear that the evidence of the prosecutrix demands no corroboration as such. Nevertheless, prudence requires the Court to seek for corroborative evidence however minimal, in order to support a conviction.” – Per Cordelia Ifeoma Jombo-Ofo, J.C.A.

 

---

MINOR’S EVIDENCE – CORROBORATION OF MINOR’S EVIDENCE

---

“Where the prosecutrix being a minor gives sworn testimony, the same needs no further corroboration.” – Per Cordelia Ifeoma Jombo-Ofo, J.C.A.

 

---

PROOF OF RAPE – ESSENTIAL ELEMENTS

---

“In the proof of rape the most essential ingredient of the offence is penetration. The extent no matter how slight will serve sufficient proof of the heinous act.” – Per Cordelia Ifeoma Jombo-Ofo, J.C.A.

 

---

CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE IN SEXUAL OFFENCES – VALUE OF CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE

---

“Sex is usually not performed in the presence of a third party. In most cases, it is a hidden act performed behind closed doors, away from the prying eyes of anyone.” – Per Cordelia Ifeoma Jombo-Ofo, J.C.A.

 

---

CORROBORATION – MEANING AND NATURE OF CORROBORATION

---

“To corroborate is to confirm by additional security and to add strength. Corroboration means evidence which confirms the evidence of the prosecutrix.” – Per Cordelia Ifeoma Jombo-Ofo, J.C.A.

 

---

HEARSAY EVIDENCE – DISTINCTION BETWEEN HEARSAY AND CORROBORATION

---

“Much as the PW2 and PW5 are obviously not eye witnesses, their role and position in the life of the victims have added strength to their case. Their evidence having strengthened the evidence of the key witnesses… cannot be swept aside in the guise of hearsay.” – Per Cordelia Ifeoma Jombo-Ofo, J.C.A.

 

---

CONSENT OF MINORS – CAPACITY TO CONSENT

---

“The victims PW3 and PW4 who are minors are by thus incapable of giving or withholding consent as the case maybe, to sexual relationship.” – Per Cordelia Ifeoma Jombo-Ofo, J.C.A.

 

---

DEFENCE OF PRIOR ABUSE – EFFECT OF PRIOR ABUSE ON CURRENT CHARGES

---

“Assuming without conceding that Amaechi had raped the PW3 and PW4 in the past, that is no justification for another person or even the appellant himself to rape the victims.” – Per Cordelia Ifeoma Jombo-Ofo, J.C.A.

 

---

EVALUATION OF EVIDENCE – DUTY OF TRIAL COURT

---

“The trial Court as much as I can say, evaluated and appraised the facts laid before him in an unassailable manner and thus came to the reasonable and unavoidable conclusion.” – Per Cordelia Ifeoma Jombo-Ofo, J.C.A.

 

---

NATURE OF RAPE OFFENCE – SECRECY OF COMMISSION

---

“Rape is an act perpetrated in secret hence it becomes a matter of the evidence of the perpetrator against that of the victim or victims.” – Per Cordelia Ifeoma Jombo-Ofo, J.C.A.

 

---

CORROBORATIVE EVIDENCE – NATURE OF CORROBORATIVE EVIDENCE

---

“The nature of the corroboration must depend on the peculiar facts of each case. Where rape is denied by the accused, the evidence of corroboration is what the Court should find.” – Per Cordelia Ifeoma Jombo-Ofo, J.C.A.

 

---

PUNISHMENT FOR SEXUAL OFFENCES – APPROPRIATENESS OF SENTENCE

---

“The appellant deserves to bear the consequences of his dastardly act. He should in the circumstances make do with the maximum sentence rightly imposed on him by the learned trial Court.” – Per Cordelia Ifeoma Jombo-Ofo, J.C.A.

 

---

CASES CITED

---

---

STATUTES REFERRED TO

---

1. Violence Against Persons (Prohibition) Act, 2015, Sections 1(1), 1(2), 5(1)

2. Evidence Act, 2011, Section 37

CLICK HERE TO READ FULL JUDGEMENT