SYLVESTER UTTEH VS. THE STATE
July 11, 2025ALHAJI KARIM LAGURO VS HONSU TOKU
July 11, 2025Legalpedia Citation: (1990) Legalpedia 90162 (SC)
In the Supreme Court of Nigeria
LAGOS
Fri Feb 14, 1992
Suit Number: SC.190/1990
CORAM
A.G. KARIBI-WHYTE JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
S. KAWU JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
S.M.A. BELGORE JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
A.B. WALI JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
E. OMOROSE JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
I.A.U. OMO JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
B.O. BABALAKIN JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
PARTIES
EDWIN OGBA
APPELLANTS
THE STATE
RESPONDENTS
AREA(S) OF LAW
NONE
SUMMARY OF FACTS
The Appellant as an accused, was charged, tried and convicted of the offence of murder at the Umuahia High Court, and was sentenced to death by hanging. His appeal to the Court of Appeal against his conviction and sentence was dismissed. He then appealed to the Supreme Court.
HELD
The Supreme Court held that even where no interpreter was available, which was not the case, only relevant evidence not interpreted would be expunged from the records
ISSUES
Is there a presumption of regularity if there is nothing on the record to show that the accused had the assistance of an interpreter?
RATIONES DECIDENDI
PRESUMPTION OF REGULARITY
“There is no doubt that to use the common law principle of the presumption of regularity to interpret entrenched constitutional rights may be inappropriate. It is however erroneous to read into a clear and unambiguous constitutional provision what it does not embrace. The provision has to be interpreted strictly in accordance with the ordinary meaning of the words used without its being adorned, as it were, with ornamental words not therein to make it attractive to wider interpretation. There is nothing in section 33 which makes it mandatory for the Court to record that an accused who could not understand the language used at the trial received the assistance of an interpreter. As stated in the case of Mohammed v. Kano N.A. (supra) cited by learned counsel, “the true test of fair hearing is the impression of a reasonable person who was present at the trial whether from his observation justice has been done in the case.” A reasonable person who was present in Court and observed that an accused had the assistance of an interpreter would be impressed that the accused had a fair hearing and that justice had been done. He would be unaffected by the absence from the court’s record of the assistance rendered to the accused by way of interpretation.” Per AKPATA, J.S.C
CASES CITED
The Queen v. Eguabor (1962) 1 All NLR. 287; (1962) 2 SCNLR 289
STATUTES REFERRED TO
The Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1979
The Criminal Procedure Code
