RAPHAEL UDE V THE STATE
April 24, 2025ECOBANK NIG PLC VS NAVY COMMODORE HARRY NGONADI
April 24, 2025Legalpedia Citation: (2016) Legalpedia (CA) 31217
In the Court of Appeal
HOLDEN AT LAGOS
Thu May 5, 2016
Suit Number: CA/L/233BC/2015
CORAM
PARTIES
IBRAHIM USMAN ALI APPELLANTS
FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF NIGERIA RESPONDENTS
AREA(S) OF LAW
SUMMARY OF FACTS
SUMMARY OF FACTS
The Appellant alongside with three others were arraigned before the High court of Lagos State for the offences of conspiracy to commit a felony, i.e. terrorism, concealing information about acts of terrorism, committing acts preparatory to or in furtherance of acts of terrorism and being in possession of prohibited firearms and ammunition contrary to section 1 (2) (b), section 8 (1) and 17 of the Terrorism (Prevention) (Amendment) Act, 2013 and also Section 516 of the Criminal Code Act, Cap C.38, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 2004, inclusive of section 8 of the Firearms Act, Cap F.28, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 2004, punishable under section 27 (1) (b) of the same Act. Initially about 17 persons were arraigned but in the course of trial 13 others were discharged pursuant to a Nolle Prosequi filed by the Attorney General of Lagos State and trial proceeded against 4 amongst whom was the Appellant. At the end of trial, the court found the Appellant guilty, convicted and sentenced him to varying terms of imprisonment which were to run consecutively. Dissatisfied with the conviction and sentence, the Appellant appealed to the Court of Appeal praying the court to allow the appeal, set aside the judgement of the lower court convicting the Appellant for the offences under the Terrorism (Prevention) (Amendment) Act, 2013 and consequently discharge and acquit the Appellant. Alternatively, the Appellant urged the court to set aside the terms of consecutive sentence passed on the Appellant and replace same with a term of concurrent sentence and reduce the total term of imprisonment to 20 years.
HELD
Appeal Dismissed
ISSUES
Whether the learned trial Judge was right when he convicted the Appellant under the Terrorism (Prevention) Amendment Act 2013? As an alternative to issue 1, whether the sentence of the appellants to a total term of 25 years is not excessive in the circumstances of the case?
RATIONES DECIDENDI
STATUTE – MEANING OF COMMENCEMENT OF A STATUTE
“Commencement simply means the beginning, the starting point, genesis, birth, kickoff, onset, initiation and dawning of a thing. For a statute or legislation, the commencement or coming into force refers to a process by which legislation, regulation and such related matters or processes and legal instruments come in to effect. Generally, it includes the publication of the legislation. It is not therefore uncommon to find a legislation not mentioning its commencement date. It can be made contingent to the happening of an event.”
INTERPRETATION ACT – APPLICABILITY OF THE INTERPRETATION ACT
“It is the tradition and practice to refer to the Interpretation Act for a number of issues touching on Legislations or Statutes. The applicability of the Interpretation Act is clearly spelt out in section 1 of the Act and it states as follows:
“1.This Act shall apply to the provisions of ANY enactment except in so far as the contrary intention appears in this Act or the enactment in question.”
LEGISLATION -WAYS OF DETERMINING THE COMMENCEMENT DATE IN A LEGISLATION
“Section 2 of the Act states:
“(1)An Act is passed when the President assents to the Bill for the act whether or not the Act then comes into force.
(2)Where no other provision is made as to the time when a particular enactment is to come into force, it shall, subject to the following subsection, come into force-
(a)In the case of an enactment contained in an Act of the national Assembly, on the day when the Act is passed;
(b)In any other case, on the day when the enactment is made.
(3)Where an enactment is expressed to come into force on a particular day, it shall be construed as coming into force immediately on the expiration of the previous day.”
SENTENCE – WHETHER AN APPELLATE COURT CAN INTERFERE WITH A SENTENCE IMPOSED BY A TRIAL COURT
“It is trite that ordinarily, an appellate court will not interfere with a sentence imposed by a trial court, unless it is manifestly excessive in the circumstances or wrong in principle, see Adeyeye V The State (1968) 1 All NLR 239 @241 where ADEMOLA CJN (of blessed memory) held as follows:
“It is only when a sentence appears to err in the principle that this court will alter it. If a sentence is excessive or inadequate to such an extent as to satisfy this court that when it was passed there was failure to apply the right principles, then this court will intervene.”
EKO, JCA in the case of Ilyasu Sumaila V The State (2012) LPELR- 19724, in the same vein held as follows:
“The trial judge, in matters of sentence, has discretion. That cannot be denied. And it is also settled that an appellate court will not readily interfere with the sentence imposed by the trial Judge unless it is manifestly excessive or wrong in principle. See Stephen V The State (Ca/C/117/2007 Of 10th December, 2008); T.S.A. Industries Ltd V Kema Investment (2006) 1 SC Pt. 964) 1.”
ALTERING A SENTENCE- FACTORS AN APPELLATE COURT MUST CONSIDER BEFORE ALTERING A SENTENCE
“It has been settled that an appeal court does not alter a sentence on the ground that it would have otherwise passed a lesser sentence, if it had been the court that conducted the trial. There are factors the appellate court must consider before altering a sentence and these are: The gravity of the offence;
The prescribed punishment for the offence;
Prevalence of the particular class of crime in a locality ; and
The circumstances of the offence to see if there are grounds of mitigating the punishment.
See Chukwudi Oyem V Federal Republic Of Nigeria (2013) LPELR – 20836 (Ca).”
SENTENCE – EXERCISE OF THE DISCRETIONARY POWER OF A TRIAL JUDGE TO IMPOSE SENTENCE
“In the case of Agbanyi V State (1995) 1 NWLR (Pt. 369), the court held as follows:
“It is settled law, that a trial Judge has discretion in matters of sentence. But the discretion or power must be exercised on the basis of the materials before him. It is desirable that in exercising his jurisdiction over sentence, a trial Judge should state in his judgment the factors that influenced his decision.”
TERRORISM – EFFECTS OF TERRORISM
“Terrorism is a serious offence and its effect is beyond the offence of just killing one human being. The effects of Terrorism include injuries, deaths, psychological trauma of the immediate victims. It has short and long term effects on the society and Nation. It also impacts on the economy of the entire nation. Buildings and infrastructure are damaged. It has no classified enemy except total destruction. Life is reduced to an imaginable state of no value.
It is a notorious fact that lives are wasted by the mere acts of some demented individuals who have made themselves outlaws. No society would sit back and tolerate such acts. In fact, terrorism has no defined enemy except the general destruction of human lives and livelihood. It is not a conventional fight or agitation. It is a fact that thousands of lives have been wasted in a region of this country, innocent citizens displayed from their ancestral homes as a result of various acts of the proscribed Boko Haram group.”
“DOUBLE JEOPARDY” – DEFINITION OF THE PRINCIPLE OF “DOUBLE JEOPARDY”
“The phrase was defined in the case of Nigerian Army V Aminun – Kano (2010) 5 NWLR (Pt 1188) 429 as follows:
“Even in the ordinary usage” double jeopardy connotes the unlawful procedure of subjecting a person to a trial on two separate occasions for the same offence. .In law also, it connotes the act of being prosecuted or tried for substantially the same offence.”
CASES CITED
STATUTES REFERRED TO
Criminal Code Act, Cap C.38,
Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 2004|
Firearms Act Cap F.28,
Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 2004|
Terrorism (Prevention) (Amendment) Act 2013|
