What is the Prosecution Required to Prove in Order to Sustain a Conviction for The Offence of Defilement?

CASE TITLE: KASUWAV v. NIGERIAN NAVY (2024) LPELR-62921(CA)
JUDGMENT DATE: 19TH AUGUST, 2024
PRACTICE AREA: CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE
LEAD JUDGMENT: OKON EFRETI ABANG, J.C.A.

SUMMARY OF JUDGMENT:

INTRODUCTION:

This appeal borders on criminal law and procedure.

FACTS:

This appeal is against the decision of the Special Court Martial of the Nigerian Navy dated 22/3/19.

The relevant facts, as stated by the victim, PW5, that testified for the prosecution. She is Nana Hashim. She stated that on 9/11/2018, at about 12 p.m., she returned from school and her mother directed her to undress. She complied and went to greet her. That she was directed to the parlor. She then told her mother that she kept kilishi in the fridge and she went to the pantry for it. She later threw the remnant in the dustbin and went back to the porch to watch television. It was not long before the accused person tapped her; she thought the accused wanted to send her on an errand, which he has been doing but rather dragged her into his room, removed his boxer, inserted his finger in her private part (vagina) and started touching her. He later placed her on the bed and then put his manhood (bumbum) in her own, after which whitish substance came out.

PW5 stated that she went outside but was afraid to tell her mother because the accused threatened that she would die and that he would kill his father. Thereafter her mother called her and saw the stain on her skirt. Her mother directed her to remove her skirt and that was when she saw the whitish substance on her lap and then directed her to remove her pants, and she obliged. It was then that her mother asked her what had happened. It was at that instance that she said the truth that the accused person raped her.  She further stated that her mother took her to the hospital, where she was examined and later taken to the Naval Unit. She was also interrogated by the regulatory officer and her statement was taken. She was later directed to go and on a later date she was called to the hospital to be re-examined.

The trial court, after considering the facts of the case and the evidence, convicted the appellant for the offence of defilement.

The appellant was dissatisfied with the decision of the Nigerian Navy and, in the exercise of its constitutional right of appeal, filed the instant appeal.

ISSUE(S) FOR DETERMINATION:

The Court adopted the sole issue formulated by the respondent in the determination of the appeal, thus:

“Whether the Respondent has proved its case against the Appellant beyond reasonable doubt.”

DECISION/HELD:

In the final analysis, the appeal was dismissed.

RATIOS:

• CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE- OFFENCE OF DEFILEMENT: What the prosecution must prove in order to sustain a conviction for the offence of defilement
• CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE- OFFENCE OF RAPE: Essential ingredients of the offence of rape
• CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE- SENTENCING: Whether an appellate Court can disturb a sentence imposed where there is no appeal against the sentence
• EVIDENCE- EVIDENCE OF AN EYE WITNESS: Whether the direct evidence of an eye witness is always required to prove the offence of rape
• EVIDENCE- BURDEN OF PROOF/STANDARD OF PROOF: Burden and standard of proof in criminal cases; how same is discharged and how to prove the guilt of an accused person
• EVIDENCE- COMPETENCE OF A CHILD: Position of the law as regards taking the evidence of a child under 14 years
• EVIDENCE- CORROBORATION/CORROBORATIVE EVIDENCE: Nature of corroborative evidence needed to convict an accused person
• EVIDENCE- CONTRADICTION IN EVIDENCE: Whether minor discrepancy in evidence of witness can be fatal to a case

To read the full judgment or similar judgments, subscribe to Prime or Primsol