LAGOS COURT ACQUITS MAN OF DEFILEMENT, ABDUCTION CHARGES OVER LACK OF EVIDENCE
Read Time:3 Minute, 21 Second
By Aishat Momoh. O.
A Lagos State Sexual Offences and Domestic Violence Court sitting in Ikeja has acquitted and discharged a man, Dauda Salami, of charges bordering on alleged defilement and abduction after ruling that the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt.
Delivering judgment on Tuesday, Justice Rahman Oshodi held that the prosecution’s case collapsed due to the absence of critical witnesses, including the alleged victim, her mother, and investigating police officers.
Salami had been arraigned on October 14, 2022, over allegations that he defiled a 12-year-old girl and abducted her in the Bariga area of Lagos in July 2021. He pleaded not guilty to the charges.
In his judgment, Justice Oshodi lamented the recurring challenge of securing witness attendance in criminal proceedings within Lagos State, describing it as a serious obstacle to the administration of justice.
According to the judge, although the prosecution listed nine witnesses in its case, only one witness eventually testified despite several witness summonses issued by the court.
“The prosecution’s original nine witnesses never came to court,” Justice Oshodi stated, adding that the case highlighted the shortcomings of existing mechanisms designed to compel witness attendance in criminal trials.
“The availability of witnesses is central to the fair and proper resolution of any criminal trial. Yet in the criminal courts of Lagos State, witnesses who made statements to the police during investigations, many of whom are alive and well within this court’s jurisdiction, frequently cannot be found or compelled to testify,” he said.
The court noted that none of the four police officers listed as witnesses appeared before the court. One of them, Inspector Onyeke Aleihunu, was granted permission to testify virtually but also failed to attend proceedings.
The only witness called by the prosecution was a nurse-midwife attached to the Women at Risk International Foundation, who presented and interpreted a medical report concerning the alleged victim.
However, Justice Oshodi held that the witness neither witnessed the alleged offences nor provided evidence directly linking the defendant to the allegations.
“The prosecutrix was not called. Her mother was not called. No police officer testified,” the judge said.
He further ruled that statements allegedly made by the child and her mother to medical personnel constituted hearsay evidence and could not be relied upon to establish the truth of the allegations.
“The accounts of the prosecutrix and her mother were not given on oath before this court. They were not tested by cross-examination. They cannot, therefore, be received as proof of the truth of their contents,” he held.
Justice Oshodi reiterated that the burden of proof in criminal cases rests entirely on the prosecution and does not shift to the defendant.
“The prosecution is required to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. It is not for the defendant to prove his innocence,” the court ruled.
The judge also held that Salami was justified in electing to rest his defence on the prosecution’s case, noting that the evidence presented was insufficient to require a response.
“In this case, the defendant took no risk at all. The prosecution’s evidence was so plainly insufficient that it required no answer,” he said.
Justice Oshodi also expressed concern over the non-implementation of the Lagos State Victim Assistance and Witness Protection Law, noting that the agency established under the law has yet to be constituted.
“The Agency established under that Law to give effect to its provisions has yet to be constituted. Its absence was felt in this case. Until the Agency is constituted and made operational, the Law will remain an aspiration rather than a reality,” he stated.
Having found that the prosecution failed to establish the essential elements of both offences, the court acquitted and discharged Salami on all counts and ordered his immediate release from custody.
“For the reasons set out in this judgment, the defendant is not guilty on both counts. He is acquitted and discharged. He is to be released from custody forthwith,” Justice Oshodi ruled.
Happy
0 %
Sad
0 %
Excited
0 %
Sleepy
0 %
Angry
0 %
Surprise
0 %
0
0