Legalpedia Citation: (2015) Legalpedia (SC) 31101
In the Supreme Court of Nigeria
Fri Feb 27, 2015
Suit Number: SC.252/2013
CORAM
MUHAMMAD SAIFULLAH MUNTAKA-COOM ASSIE JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
CHIME CENTUS NWEZE JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
ALOMA MARIAM MUKHTAR, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
ALOMA MARIAM MUKHTAR, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
ALOMA MARIAM MUKHTAR, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
PARTIES
JOSHUA CHIBI DARIYE APPELLANTS
THE FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF NIGERIA RESPONDENTS
AREA(S) OF LAW
SUMMARY OF FACTS
The Appellant who was the Governor of Plateau State was charged at the trial court for various offences bordering on money laundering, abuse of office and corruption. Upon his arraignment, the Appellant pleaded not guilty to all the 23 counts of the charge preferred against him. The matter was adjourned and the Appellant was admitted to bail. On the adjourned date which was for the Respondent to open its case, the Appellant brought a motion before the trial Court praying for an order to quash the 23 count charge against him on diverse grounds, including lack of locus standi to prosecute him and lack of jurisdiction of the trial Court to hear and determine the case. The learned trial Judge denied the application and dismissed same. The Appellant’s appeal to the lower Court was dismissed hence an appeal to this Court.
HELD
Appeal Dismissed
ISSUES
Does the proof of evidence disclose a prima facie case against the appellant? Does the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory Abuja possess the territorial jurisdiction to try the appellant on the charges filed against him? Has the Respondent power to prosecute the appellant for the offences charged? Is the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory Abuja forum non convenience for the trial?
RATIONES DECIDENDI
DUTY OF THE PROSECUTING COUNSEL TO THE COURT – THE PROSECUTING COUNSEL HAS A DUTY TO PLACE ALL RELEVANT FACTS BEFORE THE COURT
“The duty of the prosecuting Counsel is not to win, but to place all the relevant facts before the Court to enable it decide the merit vel non of the case. Manipulation of the facts implies a deliberate distortion of the facts to mislead the Court in its decision and this would amount to unethical conduct on the part of a prosecuting Counsel.”PER N.S. NGWUTA, J.S.C
INSTITUTION OF CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS – WHETHER INSTITUTION OF PROCEEDINGS AGAINST ANY PERSON BEFORE ANY COURT OTHER THAN A COURT MARTIAL IS THE EXCLUSIVE RIGHT OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE FEDERATION
“The institution of proceeding against any person before any Court in Nigeria other than a Court Martial is not the exclusive prerogative of the Attorney-General of the Federation and/or his counterpart in the State. S.174 (1) (b) and (c) and s.211 (1) (b) and (c).”PER N.S. NGWUTA, J.S.C
JURISDICTION OF THE HIGH COURT OF THE FEDERAL CAPITAL TERRITORY –SECTION 255 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF THE FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF NIGERIA
“Section 255 (1) of the Constitution of the Federation 1999 as amended created the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory Abuja in the following terms:
“S.255 (1): There shall be a High Court of the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja. S.257 (1) of the Constitution {supra) confers on the Court jurisdiction inter alia:
“To hear and determine any criminal proceeding involving or relating to any penalty, forfeiture, punishment or other liability in respect of an offence committed by any person.”PER N.S. NGWUTA, J.S.C
JURISDICTION TO TRY AN OFFENCE – DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION TO TRY AN OFFENCE WHERE ONE ELEMENT OR CONSTITUENT ELEMENTS OCCURS IN DIFFERENT JURISDICTION
“An offence may comprise of more than one element and the constituent elements may take place in different jurisdictions. In such case the appropriate means to determine in which jurisdiction to try the accused is to identify what element of the offence in the proof occurred where. See s.4 of the Penal Code as interpreted in Nyame v. FRN (2010) 7 NWLR (Pt.1193) 344 at 394-395, a case in which the facts are similar to the facts herein. See also Njovens v. The State (1973) NNLR 76 at 80.”PER N.S. NGWUTA, J.S.C
ABSENCE OF JURISDICTION- EFFECT OF A TRIAL CONDUCTED WITHOUT JURISDICTION
“A trial conducted without jurisdiction is a nullity, irrespective of how well it is conducted. See Odofin v. A.G.U. (1992) 3 NWLR (Pt. 229) 350, Osa v. Akureju (1989) 3 NWLR (Pt. 84) 508.”PER N.S. NGWUTA, J.S.C
DUTY OF LAWYERS – LAWYERS ARE TO ACT WITHIN THE RULES REGARDING ETHICAL ISSUES WHEN CONDUCTING A CASE FOR THEIR CLIENT
“Lawyers are engaged to espouse the case of their clients. It is a monopoly and they should bear in mind that like all monopolies, their conduct are subject to strict rules of accountability for adherence to set ethical standards. They can fight the cause of their clients but as lawyers they must act within the rules regarding ethical conduct. They owe a duty to their client but they owe a higher duty to a higher cause – the cause of justice.” PER N.S. NGWUTA, J.S.C
TERRITORIAL JURISDICTION- MEANING OF TERRITORIAL JURISDICTION
“Territorial jurisdiction implies a geographic area within which the authority of the Court may be exercised and outside which the Court has no power to act. Jurisdiction, territorial or otherwise, is statutory and is conferred on the Court by the law creating it.”PER N.S. NGWUTA, J.S.C
EXERCISE OF POWER OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE FEDERATION-SECTION 174 (1) OF THE 1999 CONSTITUTION OF THE FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF NIGERIA
“See s.174 (1) of the Constitution of the Federation, 1999 as amended for the exercise of the power of the Attorney-General of the Federation. Subsection 3 provides:
“In exercising his powers under this section, the Attorney-General of the Federation shall have regard to the public interest, the interest of justice and the need to prevent abuse of legal process.”PER N.S. NGWUTA, J.S.C
DUTY OF COUNSEL IN A CRIMINAL CHARGE – A COUNSEL SHOULD NOT RESORT TO MOTIONS AIMED AT SCUTTLING THE PROCESS OF DETERMINING WHETHER OR NOT THERE IS SUBSTANCE IN THE CHARGE AS LAID
“It is not the duty of learned Counsel to resort to motions aimed principally at delaying or even scuttling the process of determining whether or not there is substance in the charges as laid.”PER N.S. NGWUTA, J.S.C
PRIMA FACIE CASE – EVIDENCE DISCLOSES A PRIMA FACIE CASE WHEN IT PROVES THE CASE AGAINST THE DEFENDANT IF UNCONTROVERTED
“Evidence discloses a prima facie case when it is such that if un-contradicted and if believed, will be sufficient to prove the case against the defendant, Ohwovoriole v FRN [2003] 2 NWLR (pt 803) 176; [2003] 1 SC (pt 1) 1; (2003) LPELR-SC.392/2001; Ajiboye v State [1994] 8 NWLR (pt 364) 587; Ekwunugo v FRN [2008] 15 NWLR (Pt 1111) 630; [2008] 7 SC 196; Tongov COP (2007) LPELR-SC. 105/2000; Abacha v State [2001] 3 NWLR (pt 699) 35; Daboh v State [1977] 5 SC 197.” PER C. C. NWEZE, J.S.C
POWER TO PROSECUTE OFFENCE- FACTORS DETERMINING THE POWER TO PROSECUTE AN OFFENCE
“Generally speaking, power to prosecute for an offence is not determined by the ownership of the property allegedly stolen or misappropriated…” The determining factors are:
(a) Who can exercise prosecutional power over the offence
(b) The nature of the offence charged and,
(c) Where the offence was committed – the venue.”PER N.S. NGWUTA, J.S.C
PRIMA FACIE – DEFINITION OF A PRIMA FACIE CASE
“Prima facie case” is defined as:
“(1) The establishment of a legally required rebuttable presumption.
(2) A party’s production of enough evidence to allow the fact-finder to infer the fact at issue and rule in the party’s favour.”
JURISDICTION – DEFINITION OF JURISDICTION
“Jurisdiction as defined in Black’s Law Dictionary, 8th Edition page 867 is the Court’s power to decide a case or issue a decree. See A-G Federation v. A-G Abia State & 35 ors (2001) 7 SC (Pt. 1) 100 wherein this Court held that the word “jurisdiction” means the authority the Court has to decide matters before it or to take cognizance of matter presented in a formal way for its decision. See also National Bank v. Shoyoye(1977) 5 SC 181.”
TERRITORIAL JURISDICTION- MEANING OF TERRITORIAL JURISDICTION
“Territorial jurisdiction implies a geographic area within which the authority of the Court may be exercised and outside which the Court has no power to act. Jurisdiction, territorial or otherwise, is statutory and is conferred on the Court by the law creating it.”
JURISDICTION OF THE HIGH COURT OF THE FEDERAL CAPITAL TERRITORY -SECTION 255 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF THE FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF NIGERIA
“Section 255 (1) of the Constitution of the Federation 1999 as amended created the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory Abuja in the following terms:
“S.255 (1): There shall be a High Court of the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja. S.257 (1) of the Constitution {supra) confers on the Court jurisdiction inter alia:
“To hear and determine any criminal proceeding involving or relating to any penalty, forfeiture, punishment or other liability in respect of an offence committed by any person.”
JURISDICTION TO TRY AN OFFENCE – DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION TO TRY AN OFFENCE WHERE ONE ELEMENT OR CONSTITUENT ELEMENTS OCCURS IN DIFFERENT JURISDICTION
“An offence may comprise of more than one element and the constituent elements may take place in different jurisdictions. In such case the appropriate means to determine in which jurisdiction to try the accused is to identify what element of the offence in the proof occurred where. See s.4 of the Penal Code as interpreted in Nyame v. FRN (2010) 7 NWLR (Pt.1193) 344 at 394-395, a case in which the facts are similar to the facts herein. See also Njovens v. The State (1973) NNLR 76 at 80.”
EXERCISE OF POWER OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE FEDERATION-SECTION 174 (1) OF THE 1999 CONSTITUTION OF THE FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF NIGERIA
“See s.174 (1) of the Constitution of the Federation, 1999 as amended for the exercise of the power of the Attorney-General of the Federation. Subsection 3 provides:
“In exercising his powers under this section, the Attorney-General of the Federation shall have regard to the public interest, the interest of justice and the need to prevent abuse of legal process.”
POWER TO PROSECUTE OFFENCE- FACTORS DETERMINING THE POWER TO PROSECUTE AN OFFENCE
“Generally speaking, power to prosecute for an offence is not determined by the ownership of the property allegedly stolen or misappropriated…” The determining factors are:
(a)Who can exercise prosecutional power over the offence
(b)The nature of the offence charged and,
(c)Where the offence was committed – the venue.”
INSTITUTION OF CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS – WHETHER INSTITUTION OF PROCEEDINGS AGAINST ANY PERSON BEFORE ANY COURT OTHER THAN A COURT MARTIAL IS THE EXCLUSIVE RIGHT OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE FEDERATION
“The institution of proceeding against any person before any Court in Nigeria other than a Court Martial is not the exclusive prerogative of the Attorney-General of the Federation and/or his counterpart in the State. S.174 (1) (b) and (c) and s.211 (1) (b) and (c).”
DUTY OF THE PROSECUTING COUNSEL TO THE COURT – THE PROSECUTING COUNSEL HAS A DUTY TO PLACE ALL RELEVANT FACTS BEFORE THE COURT
“The duty of the prosecuting Counsel is not to win, but to place all the relevant facts before the Court to enable it decide the merit vel non of the case. Manipulation of the facts implies a deliberate distortion of the facts to mislead the Court in its decision and this would amount to unethical conduct on the part of a prosecuting Counsel.”
DUTY OF COUNSEL IN A CRIMINAL CHARGE – A COUNSEL SHOULD NOT RESORT TO MOTIONS AIMED AT SCUTTLING THE PROCESS OF DETERMINING WHETHER OR NOT THERE IS SUBSTANCE IN THE CHARGE AS LAID
“It is not the duty of learned Counsel to resort to motions aimed principally at delaying or even scuttling the process of determining whether or not there is substance in the charges as laid.”
ABSENCE OF JURISDICTION- EFFECT OF A TRIAL CONDUCTED WITHOUT JURISDICTION
“A trial conducted without jurisdiction is a nullity, irrespective of how well it is conducted. See Odofin v. A.G.U. (1992) 3 NWLR (Pt. 229) 350, Osa v. Akureju (1989) 3 NWLR (Pt. 84) 508.”
DUTY OF LAWYERS – LAWYERS ARE TO ACT WITHIN THE RULES REGARDING ETHICAL ISSUES WHEN CONDUCTING A CASE FOR THEIR CLIENT
“Lawyers are engaged to espouse the case of their clients. It is a monopoly and they should bear in mind that like all monopolies, their conduct are subject to strict rules of accountability for adherence to set ethical standards. They can fight the cause of their clients but as lawyers they must act within the rules regarding ethical conduct. They owe a duty to their client but they owe a higher duty to a higher cause – the cause of justice.”
PRIMA FACIE CASE – EVIDENCE DISCLOSES A PRIMA FACIE CASE WHEN IT PROVES THE CASE AGAINST THE DEFENDANT IF UNCONTROVERTED
“Evidence discloses a prima facie case when it is such that if un-contradicted and if believed, will be sufficient to prove the case against the defendant, Ohwovoriole v FRN [2003] 2 NWLR (pt 803) 176; [2003] 1 SC (pt 1) 1; (2003) LPELR-SC.392/2001; Ajiboye v State [1994] 8 NWLR (pt 364) 587; Ekwunugo v FRN [2008] 15 NWLR (Pt 1111) 630; [2008] 7 SC 196; Tongov COP (2007) LPELR-SC. 105/2000; Abacha v State [2001] 3 NWLR (pt 699) 35; Daboh v State [1977] 5 SC 197.”
CASES CITED
STATUTES REFERRED TO
Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999Economic and Financial crimes Act, 2004Penal Code, Cap. 532, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 1990