Whether The Defence of Provocation and Self-Defence are Mutually Exclusive

CASE TITLE: JACKSON v. STATE (2025) LPELR-80692(SC)
JUDGMENT DATE: 7TH MARCH, 2025
PRACTICE AREA: CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE
LEAD JUDGMENT: MOHAMMED BABA IDRIS, J.S.C.

SUMMARY OF JUDGMENT:

INTRODUCTION:

This appeal borders on criminal law and procedure.

FACTS:

This is an appeal against the judgment of the Court of Appeal, Yola.

The Appellant was on his farm on 27/1/2015, in a bush within the village area of Kodomti in Numan Local Government Area of Adamawa State. The evidence of the Appellant which was not debunked, was that, on the fateful day, he was working on his farm when the deceased, Ardo Bawuro, rushed in with his cattle and asked him whether he saw the people who had earlier rustled some of his cattle and who he thought had passed through the Appellant’s farm. The Appellant denied seeing anyone. The deceased then drove his cattle through the Appellant’s farm, and the Appellant challenged him. The deceased got angry and brought out a knife when the Appellant tried to drive the cattle away from his farm. As the Appellant had no weapons, he started running away from the deceased and shouted for help, but no help was near. The deceased pursued him and stabbed him at the back of his neck, and when he kicked the deceased to get away, the deceased stabbed him on his left leg. The trial Judge confirmed that the Court, the prosecution, and defence counsel saw the wounds inflicted by the deceased on the Appellant on the back of his head and on his left leg.

The deceased eventually caught up with the Appellant and attacked him with the knife. During the struggle that ensued, the Appellant was able to overpower the deceased, wrestled the knife from him, and immediately stabbed him thrice on the throat.

Appellant was arraigned on a one-count charge of culpable homicide punishable with death, contrary to Section 221(a) of the Penal Code CAP 98 Laws of Adamawa State 1997, to which the Appellant pleaded not guilty.

At the conclusion of the trial, the trial Court convicted the Appellant and consequently sentenced him to death by hanging until certified dead by a medical doctor or as the Executive Governor of Adamawa State may direct. Dissatisfied with the judgment of the trial Court, the Appellant appealed to the Court of Appeal, which Court dismissed the Appellant’s appeal and affirmed the conviction and sentence of the Appellant by the trial Court. Still dissatisfied with the judgment of the Court of Appeal, Appellant appealed to the Supreme Court.

ISSUES FOR DETERMINATION:
The issues for determination were:

1. Whether the learned Justices of the Court of Appeal were not in grave error when they refused the Appellant’s defense of self-defence and upheld the conviction and sentence of the trial Court?
2. Whether the learned Justices of the Court of Appeal were not in error when they stated that the statement of the Appellant was confessional and the trial Court could safely convict the Appellant on same?

DECISION/HELD:
In a majority decision, the Supreme Court dismissed the appeal. Ogunwumiju, JSC dissented and allowed the appeal. Conequently, the dissenting judge recommended the Appellant as a proper candidate for the Governor of Adamawa State to exercise his prerogative of mercy.

RATIOS:
● CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE- OFFENCE OF CULPABLE HOMICIDE PUNISHABLE WITH DEATH: Ingredient(s) that must be proved to establish the offence of culpable homicide punishable with death
● CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE- GUILT OF AN ACCUSED PERSON: How to establish/prove the guilt of an accused person
● CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE- PROBABLE CONSEQUENCE: Whether the Court will infer death as a probable consequence of the act of an accused person if a dangerous weapon was used
● CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE- DEFENCE OF SELF-DEFENCE: Nature and effect of the defence of self defence
● CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE- DEFENCE OF SELF-DEFENCE: How the court determines what amounts to excessive force in considering the defence of self-defence
● CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE- DEFENCE(S) OF ACCUSED PERSON(S): Whether the appellate court can consider all defences or evidence in criminal cases even when not raised by the appellant
● CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE- DEFENCE OF PROVOCATION: Meaning and nature of the defence of provocation
● CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE- DEFENCE OF SELF-DEFENCE/PROVOCATION: Whether the defence of provocation and self-defence are mutually exclusive
● CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE- DEFENCE OF SELF-DEFENCE/PROVOCATION: Whether an accused person can be entitled to the defence of provocation and self defence at the same time in relation to the same offence
● EVIDENCE- CONFESSIONAL STATEMENT: Position of the law where an accused gives oral evidence which is inconsistent with or contradicts the contents of his statement
● EVIDENCE- CONFESSIONAL STATEMENT: Whether confession is the best form of evidence in a criminal trial
● EVIDENCE- CONFESSIONAL STATEMENT: Position of the law where an accused gives oral evidence which is inconsistent with or contradicts the contents of his statement

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