Just Decided Cases

GODWIN ANYANWU V. THE STATE

Legalpedia Citation: (1981) Legalpedia (SC) 81112

In the Supreme Court of Nigeria

Thu May 28, 1981

Suit Number: SC. 34/1979

CORAM


OLABODE RHODES-VIVOUR

GEORGE S. SOWEMIMO, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT

KAYODE ESO, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT

ANIAGOLU JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT

ANTHONY N. ANIAGOLU, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT


PARTIES


GODWIN ANYANWU APPELLANTS


RESPONDENTS


AREA(S) OF LAW



SUMMARY OF FACTS

The appellant murdered the deceased with a machete as a result of dispute over ownership of bicycle carriage.


HELD


The court affirmed his conviction for murder.


ISSUES


1. Can it be safely concluded that Exhibits C and D were indeed the confessional statements personally made by the appellant to the police?2. Whether the provisions of section 33 subsection (6)(e) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1979, as amended, which were designed to guarantee fair hearing to every person who is charged with a criminal offence (such as the appellant in this case) were fully complied with in the instant case and, if not, did such non-compliance not nullify the entire proceedings and judgment of the trial court?3. Whether the provisions of section 33(7) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1979, as amended, were fully complied with in this case and, if not, did such non-compliance not render the trial unfair.4. Was the court below right in holding that the appellant was not entitled to the defence of provocation to mitigate his criminal culpability from murder to manslaughter?”


RATIONES DECIDENDI


USE OF INTERPRETER DURING TRIAL – WHEN NECESSARY


The use of an interpreter only becomes mandatory where a person charged with a criminal offence does not understand the language used at the trial – Ogundare J.S.C.


USE OF INTERPRETER DURING TRIAL MUST BE RECORDED BY THE JUDGE


Where an interpreter is provided at the commencement of the trial and a record of this is made, it is desirable, and indeed a constitutional duty of the trial judge to record this fact also on the subsequent days of the trial when use is made of the interpreter. Where, however, the judge fails to make a record of the use the interpreter in subsequent days the trial is not, per se, there vitiated – – Ogundare J.S.C.


CASES CITED


Peter Lockman & Anor. v. The State (1972) ANLR 498 Fawehinmi Construction Co. Ltd. v. Obafemi Awolowo University (1998) 6 NWLR (Pt. 553) 171 Godwin Josiah v. The State (1985) 1 NWLR (Pt. 1) 125 The State v. Salihu Mohammed Gwonto and Ors. (1983) 1 S.C.N.L.R. 142


STATUTES REFERRED TO


The 1979 Constitution   ?


CLICK HERE TO READ FULL JUDGMENT

Esther ORIAH

Recent Posts

RENCO NIGERIA LIMITED V Q OIL & GAS SERVICES LIMITED & ANOR

Legalpedia Citation: (2025-08) Legalpedia 42685 (CA) In the Court of Appeal PORT HARCORT Mon Aug…

3 weeks ago

ENGINEERING ENTERPRISE OF NIGER CONTRACTOR CO. OF NIGERIA VS THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL OF KADUNA STATE

Legalpedia Citation: Legalpedia SC KIZW In the Supreme Court of Nigeria Thu Sep 11, 2025…

3 weeks ago

COMMISSONER OF POLICE, WESTERN REGION VS ALOYSIUS IGWE & 2 ORS

Legalpedia Citation: (1960-01) Legalpedia 19912 (SC) In the Supreme Court of Nigeria Holden at Lagos…

3 weeks ago

CLEMENT AKRAN VS INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE

Legalpedia Citation: (1960-02) Legalpedia 45350 (SC) In the Supreme Court of Nigeria HOLDEN AT LAGOS…

3 weeks ago

J. A. IREM VS OBUBRA DISTRICT COUNCIL AND OTHERS

Legalpedia Citation: (1960-03) Legalpedia 03348 (SC) In the Supreme Court of Nigeria HOLDEN AT LAGOS…

3 weeks ago

JOHN KHALIL KHAWAM AND CO VS K CHELLARAM AND SONS (NIGERIA)

Legalpedia Citation: (1960-03) Legalpedia 49115 (SC) In the Supreme Court of Nigeria HOLDEN AT LAGOS…

3 weeks ago