EFFECT OF CONVICTION ON AN OFFENCE UNKNOWN TO LAW;CHIEF BODE GEORGE

A Lagos state high court, Justice Olubunmi Oyewole in 2009 convicted Chief Bode George ,a People’s Democratic Party chieftain alongside with five others for corruption and diversion of funds when he served on the board of the Nigerian Port Authority.  He was sentenced to two years imprisonment.

The convict appealed against this decision praying to the court to set aside the charge of corruption and splitting contracts brought against him were unknown to law at the time of his conviction of the crime.

The Supreme Court justice Fabiyi granted his prayer by quashing all charges of corruption earlier leveled against him, thereby making him a free man (he is no longer an ex-convict)

We shall examine the legal effect of conviction that is found on a defective charge and see if the judgment of the supreme court is in compliance with the provision of the law.

A charge is the statement of offences with which an accused is charged in a summary trial before a court.

If a conviction will be upheld or set aside depends on the effect the defect had on the accused person in the conduct of his defense.

Where the accused is prejudiced in the conduct of his defense, the defect brought about the conviction of the accused or where the defect so affected the requirement of justice.

If any of the above is proved then the judgment will occasion a miscarriage of justice. Therefore conviction made on such defective charge will be set aside. 

Chief Bode George’s prayer was that he was convicted on an offence that is unknown to law at the time of his conviction.

Section 36(12) of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria states that a person shall not be convicted of a criminal offence unless that offence is defined and the penalty therefore is prescribed in a written law i.e. An act of the National Assembly, Law of a state or any subsidiary legislation or instrument made under the provision of a law.

In AOKO V. FAGBEMI & ANOR (1961) 1 ALL NLR PT 400 the accused person was charged, tried and convicted for adultery, on appeal his conviction was quashed because the offence of adultery is not defined ad penalized under the criminal code which the charge was brought.

Criminal code is used in criminal proceedings in the southern part of Nigeria while the penal code is used in the northern part of Nigeria. According to section 378 and 388 of the penal code adultery is a criminal offence in the north. 

Also in the case of ATTORNEY GENERAL V. DR CLEMENT ISONG(1986) 1 QLRN 86 the conviction of the accused was quashed on appeal where the supreme court held that the accused could not be convicted of unlawful possession of firearms contrary to section 3 and unlawful possession of ammunition contrary to section 9 of the firearms Act 1966 because neither of the sections stated penalty for the alleged offences .

Therefore, since the offences which chief Bode George was convicted of were unknown t law then the conviction cannot stand and these has nothing to do with how influential he is but based on the provision of the law which has been in existence even before he was charged for the unknown offence.

Chief Bode George is now a free man.

Thank you.

Oyenike Alliyu-Adebiyi LLB(hons)BL