The Doctrine of No Case Submission: A Legal Analysis.

By AbdulGaniy Adisa Jimoh

Introduction

The Administration of Criminal Justice Act, 2015 (ACJA) seeks to revise our criminal law and the administration of criminal justice in particular. The Act exhibits some important features some of which are hitherto unknown to our criminal jurisprudence but which are aimed at transforming the tedious and slow dispensation of criminal justice in Nigeria.[1] Section 302 of the ACJA provides as follows: ‘The court may, on its own motion or on application by the defendant after hearing the evidence of the prosecution, where it considers that the evidence against the defendant or any of several defendants is not sufficient to justify the continuation of the trial, record a finding of not guilty in respect of the defendant without calling on him or them to enter his or their defence and the defendant shall accordingly be discharged and the court shall then call on the remaining defendant, if any, to enter his defence.’  [2]A cursory look at the above section reveals that a submission of no case to answer can either be raised by the court of the defendant. The section further empowers the court to, on its own motion, record a finding of not guilty where it considers the evidence as insufficient to warrant the continuation of the trial. This the court can do without necessarily calling on the parties to address it on the issue of no case submission. As far as Nigeria is concerned, when a person is charged with an offence, the person (accused person) can either plead guilty or not. So, in an instance where the accused plead guilty for such an offence, it is the sole tasks of the prosecution to provide evidence that every elements of the offence have have been committed, and establish that the defendants committed them. Be that as it may, the burden of proof lies with them, and it has always in criminal trial proves “beyond reasonable doubt.” In every criminal trial in Nigeria, it is the main duty of the prosecution to establish that the accused is guilty beyond reasonable doubt, this is deemed a very factual instance to uphold the main principle that everyone is deemed innocent, until proven guilty. So, if any pinch or   when the case is over, then the court must acquit the accused. In essence, the process of criminal trial has two segments; the first segment permits the prosecution to present it case, and call upon witnesses, whereas the second segment presents it own case and call upon witnesses. It is further asserts that, in both parts 1 and 2,the lawyer for the other side can cross examine the witnesses, that have been duly presented to avail or give evidence.[3]

So, a deep into the next line of discussion justifies the instant topic.

CONCEPTUAL CLARIFICATION

Without mincing words, the doctrine of no case submission is deemed an ancient concept in the administration of criminal justice in Nigeria, it is termed as a procedural defence mechanism deployed in criminal litigation. It is also available in both civil and criminal proceeding. In a nutshell, a no case submission comes immediately after the presentation of the presentation of the case of the prosecution and not after the defendant has entered his defence

SUCCINCT HISTORY OF THE DOCTRINE OF NO CASE SUBMISSION

It is derived from the Common Law system of accusatorial justice. In the extant system, the golden rule is for the onus to be upon the prosecution through the entirety of the criminal trial, all in a bid to establish the guilt of the accused person (sometimes known as the defendant) beyond reasonable doubt. So, if at the end, a pinch of reasonable doubt is detected from the minds of the court, such a doubt shall be resolved in favour of the accused person, and will be acquitted and set free. [4]In furtherance, a reliable source opines that, the Lord Sankey L. C.made the earliest of the doctrine is derived in the House of Lords in WOOLMIGTON v. D. P. P. (1935) AC 462. thus: “If, at the end of and on the whole of the case of the prosecution, there is reasonable doubt created by the evidence given by either the prosecution or the defence, as to whether the prisoner killed the deceased with a malicious intention, the prosecution has not made out the case, and the prisoner is entitled to an acquittal.” The principle was followed in R v. Basil Lawrence (1933) 11 NLR 6 by Lord Atkin and later incorporated into the Nigerian Evidence Act.[5]

STANDARD FOR NO CASE SUBMISSION

The common standard which the Court deploys in Nigeria to ascertain whether a no case permission should be permitted, and the accused person should be set free is established under Section 303 of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act 2015.It is equally provides that the judge has to consider four things to wit[6].

a)Whether an essential element of the offence has been proven beyond the prosecution

1. b) Whether there is evidence linking the defendant with the commission of the offence

c)If the evidence so far which the prosecution has provided is one that, no reasonable court or tribunal would convict on.

d)Any other ground on which the court may that a primafacie case has not been made out against the defendant for him to be called upon to answer.

The common standard which the court the court deploys in knowing whether a case should be dismissed on the ground of no case submission is not of beyond reasonable doubt, the court while determining this has to deliberate whether a primafacie case has been established by the prosecution.Prima facie portrays the standard of proof in which the prosecution requires in presenting enough evidence to establish a rebuttable presumption that the matter asserted is truth and nothing but the whole truth.[7]

 WHAT HAPPEN WHEN A NO CASE SUBMISSION IS USEFUL

Without any iota of doubt, the judge shall dismiss it against the defendant.[8]

ILLUSTRATION OF A NO CASE SUBMISSION

For a better comprehension of a no case submission, a football match can be symbolized as a perfect example. For instance, there are two halves; In the first half, the prosecution possess the ball, and trying to score the defence. They(the prosecution) have the totality of first half to try to score a few goal. By the end of the first half, they have not still scored, and it still 0–0, the referee will quit the match and award success to the defence.(That is, no case submission).[9]

Nevertheless, if the Prosecution scores before the end of the first half, then the game moves to the second half, and defence possess the ball, try to equalize(or score more goals), if the defence is able to score as many goals than the prosecution in the first half, then by the end of the match, the referee announces the defence as the winner and the accused is acquitted. On the other hand, if defence does not score enough goals as the prosecution has done in the first half, then the referee will declare the prosecution as winner and convict the accused.[10]

An issue as weighty as no case submission should not be left for the courts to raise and decide without affording parties the opportunity to address it on same. An issue as serious as no case submission should not be handed to the courts to decide without availing the neccessa6 parties opportunities to address same. Most importantly, the courts up to the Apex Court has decided in multifarious cases that a court is not empowered to raise an issue singlehandedly (suo moto), without granting audience to the parties to be This is due to the fact that the court has left it exalted position as “impartial arbiter “and delved into the arena of conflict. This has received judicial blessings in the case of Egbuchu v. Continental Merchant Bank Plc. & Ors (2016) LER SC Q3Z2 per Kekere-Ekun JSC. In the same vein, in the case of Olusanya v. Olusanya (1983) 14 NSCC 97 at 102, the Supreme Court stated the principle regarding raising an issue suo moto by the court thus:

“This court has said on a number of occasions that although a court is entitled to, in its discretion, to take points suo moto, if it sees fit to do so, yet that discretion must be exercised sparingly and in exceptional circumstances only: where the points are so taken, the parties must be given the opportunity tom address the court before decision on the point is made.” See also Ejike v. COP (2015) 4-5 SC (Pt. 1) 101; Ogwe v. IGP (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1459) 505; Tinubu v. IMB Securities (2001) 8 MJSC 1.

By extension of the aforementioned standpoints, It is important to call into remembrance at this aspect that the common rule that courts must hear parties once an issue is raised suo moto like every other legal rule has three exceptions as depicted in the legal maxim “Exceptio Probat Regulam” For every general rule, there must be an exception. The exceptions are aptly captured hereunder:

1.When the issue relates to the court’s own jurisdiction

2.When both parties are not aware or ignored a statute which may have bearing on the case.

3.When on the face of the record, serious questions on the fairness of the proceedings are evident. See Gbagbarigha v. Toruemi (2013) 6 NWLR (Pt. 1350) 289 at 310; Angadi v. PDP (2018) 15 NWLR (Pt. 1641) 1 at 23.

In furtherance of the above, it can be contested that the issue of No Case Submission is line with the court’s own jurisdiction without inviting parties to address it on same. Without any pinch of doubt, it is enough to state that none of these exceptions are applicable in terms of no case submission, as the appropriate thing expected from a court is to invite parties to address and discuss it on same, whenever no case submission has been raised.

CONCLUSION

Without mincing words, Section 302 of the ACJA, 2015 is a welcome advancement in criminal justice administration, this is more so when the courts are given the liberty to intervene on the behalf of the defendant. It is my humble submission and candid advice that once an issue of no case submission is raised suo moto, parties should, as a matter of necessity be subpoenaed to address the court on same. Above all, this article addressed the doctrine of no case submission, from it introductory segment, conceptual clarification, succinct history, standard for no case submission, illustration and other analysis.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

AbdulGaniy Adisa Jimoh is a Law Finalist at the Faculty of Law, Bayero University, Kano,an award winning writer, educator ,and a Legal researcher. He is the current Director of Finance, Equity Chambers, Chairman, Editorial Committee, for National Association of Muslim Law Student. He can be reached vide the following handles:

G-mail:jimohadisa546@gmail.com

WhatsApp : 08090666588

Linkedin:Www.linkedin.com/mwlite/in/jimohabdulganiy-adisa-100121212

Reference

[1] Prince Azubuike Esq: No Case Submission At The Instance Of The Court: An Examination Of Section 302 Of The ACJA, available at :<https://thenigerialawyer.com/no-case-submission-at-the-instance-of-the-court-an-examination-of-section-302-of-the-acja/> Accessed on 15th April,2025.

[2] Administration of Criminal Justice Act, 2015 (ACJA

[3] Ibid(1)

[4] Chukudi O. Okwelum: No Case Submission in Nigerian Criminal Trials: Has Delta State of Nigeria abolished it?

[5] Ibid

[6] No Case Submission in Nigeria, available at <https://lawpadi.com/no-case-submission/> accessed 15th of April,2025

[7] Ibid

[8] Ibid

[9] Ibid

[10] Ibid

Source: Sabilaw