Connect with us

Law/Judiciary

Warrant Of Arrest

Published

on

Every warrant of arrest shall bear the date of is
sue, shall contain all necessary particulars and shall be signed by the judge or magistrate by whom it is issued.
The warrant is expected to state concisely the offence or matter for which it is issued and shall name or otherwise describe the person to be arrested, and it shall order the police officer or officers to whom it is directed to arrest the person and bring him before the court to answer the complaint or statement, or to testify or others wise according to the circumstance of the case and to be further dealt with according to law.
All warrant of arrest must be made in writing on oat by the complainant himself or by a warrant witness.  Note that warrant of arrest may  be issued on any day, including Sundays or public holidays.  A warrant of arrest may be directed to a police officer by name or to all police officers but in some exceptional cases, a court issuing a warrant of arrest may if its immediate execution is necessary and no police officer is immediately available, direct it to some other person(s) as the person(s) shall execute the warrant.
The person executing a warrant of arrest  directed to him shall have all the powers, rights, privileges and protection given to or afforded by law to a police officer executing a warrant of arrest and shall confirm with the requirement placed by law on such a police officer.  A warrant shall not be returnable at any particular time; it shall remain in force until it is executed or until it is cancelled by a judge or a magistrate, as the case may be.
Procedures for execution of warrant.
Every warrant of arrest may be executed  on any day including Sunday and public holidays.
Every such warrant may be executed by a police officer at any time and in any place other than the court room.
The person executing the warrant, shall before making the arrest, inform the person to be arrested that there is a warrant for his arrest unless there is reasonable cause  for abstaining room giving such information on the grounds that it is likely to occasion escape, resistance or rescue.
Also note that a warrant of arrest may be executed  not withstanding that it is not in the possession of the person executing it, but the warrant shall on the demand by the person arrested, be shown to him within a reasonable time in a state different from the state where the warrant of arrest is issued, the following procedure has to be followed:
1. The warrant of arrest will be taken before a magistrate  within the state where the offender resides or is found.  The magistrate will be required to endorse the warrant of arrest after having satisfied himself that:
i. The warrant of arrest was indeed issued by a competent authority such as magistrate, judge, superior police officer or justice of peace; and
ii. That the alleged offence is one that is known to the law of the state, which issues the warrant.
In Commissioner of Police V Apanpa (Unreported) M/42/1968 High Court  Lagos State, an Alkali Court issued a warrant of arrest in the then Benue/Plateau State a Magistrate Court in Lagos endorsed it.  In accordance with the endorsement of the warrant of arrest by the Alkali Court, the Magistrate court in Lagos ordered that the person arrested under the warrant be taken back to Benue/Plateau state, the person applied to the High Court to set aside  the order of the magistrate court.  It was held that the Nlkali court was not competent to issue a warrant of arrest  because it was not a court as contemplated by the law and consequently the magistrate court in Lagos should not have endorsed the warrant.

 

Nkechi Bright Ewere

Print Friendly, PDF & Email
Continue Reading

Law/Judiciary

Corroboration Of Evidence

Published

on

There is no law where provision is made for the number of witnesses that must testify before a plaintiff or the persecution will succeed in his case. A court can convict on a single witness. A case is not decided by the number of witnesses, single credible convincing evidence is enough to convict. But there are exceptions, such exceptions are circumstances where corroboration is required before a judge can decide his case.
Corroboration is the ground for the amenability of certain evidence for the purpose of conviction and if the corroborating evidence is not the same with the existing evidence an accused cannot be convicted upon such existing evidence. Corroboration simply means confirmation, support. In Ogumbayo V. State (2007) 8 NWLR (Pt 1035) P. 157, the Supreme Court holds per Ogbuagu JSC that “corroboration is not technical term of art and means no more than evidence tending to confirm, support and strengthen other evidence sought to be corroborated”.
Hence corroborative evidence is an independent testimony implicating the accused to the charge and supportive of the testimony requiring corroboration. This corroborative evidence may be the testimony of another witness, or in a piece of real evidence tendered or in the conduct of the accused himself or from what the accused said. Corroboration therefore implies the existence of more than one piece of evidence, in which the corroborative evidence comes in to confirm, ratify, verify or validate the existing evidence coming from another independent witness or witnesses.
Corroboration of evidence is not required exception where the law demands it. Oputa JSC in Onafowakan V. The State (1987) 7 SCNJ @ 233 holds that. “It is trite that the evidence of one solitary credible witness can establish a case beyond reasonable doubt and that it is said that truth is not discovered by a majority vote”. Although a court of law need not take the fact of the number of witnesses per se into account in deciding which side that would succeed, yet the Evidence Act creates some exceptions in relation thereto.
Some of the exceptions are treason and treasonable offence, perjury, an unsworn evidence of a child witness and Breach of Promise to marry. Breach of Promise to marry is perhaps the only instance of civil cause in which corroboration is required as a matter of law for a plaintiff to recover a verdict. Section 197 of the Evidence Act 2011 provides that “no plaintiff in any action for breach of Promise of marriage can recover a verdict, unless his or her testimony is corroborated by some other material evidence in support of such promises….”
Corroboration is an exception created by law and judicial practio, the general rule being that one qualitative evidence is enough to found a conviction.

 

By: Nkechi Bright-Ewere

Print Friendly, PDF & Email
Continue Reading

Law/Judiciary

Rivers Judiciary Workers’ Welfare Tops Union’s Agenda

Published

on

Workers’ welfare and other social benefits  were to top on the agenda of the Judiciary Staff Union of Nigeria (JUSUN),  Rivers State branch, following its election last Friday in Port Harcourt.
The hint came from the electoral committee chairman, Ken Agi as he gave charge to the newly elected executive of the union in River state.
Agi said union leaders must learn how to put the interest of members top, if they must do well as leaders.
He explained that JUSUN was a group made of talented people who are determined to evoke change in the system.
About the peaceful atmosphere witnessed during the election, he said that it was the making of the Chief Justice of the state, Hon Justice Iyayi Lamiankara.
The union’s eleco boss, hinted that the CJ, was interested in workers’ welfare, hence her insistence on quality electoral process devoid of rancour.
The returning officer of the the election,  Comrade Marwan  Adamu,  who corroborated  Agi’s views, said workers’ welfare package must top the agenda of any good executive.
Adamu, the National President of the union, further tasked the new leadership of the union in the state to  shun what he described as divide and rule system.
Declaring the nine -man committee returned as elected, he swore them in for immediate action.
In his victory speech, the chairman of the union,  Comrade Anthony Nwachukwu, assured workers of all inclusive government.
Nwachukwu, stressed that for the sake of the union, there was no victor or vanquished at the poll, and added that the victory belonged to the entire workers.
He therefore, called on his members to   be up and doing in order to promote the interest of the union.
JUSUN is the umbrella body of judiciary workers in the country.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email
Continue Reading

Law/Judiciary

Human Rights Day: NHRC Urges Youths To Shun Criminality

Published

on

The National Human Rights Commission (NHRC), has appealed to youths to stay off crimes, but defend their rights for the development of the nation.
The commission made the appeal  yesterday in Lagos as  Nigeria joins the rest of the  world to mark the  2019  International Day for  Human Rights.
The South-West Commander, NHRC, Mr Lucas Koyejo,  speaking with  The Tide source said that many youths were into various crimes.
He urged them to be more active and vocal in promoting whatever concerns the nation saying that no one would step down for them to occupy leadership.
The commander speaking on the theme of this year said that the UN picked it to draw the attention of the youth to their responsibilities and the need for others to support them.
The Tide reports that the UN had set aside Dec.10 of every year as the International Day for Human Rights.
This  year’s theme is: “Youth Standing Up for Human Rights.’’
Koyejo said, “The UN knows that the youth are the future leaders of the world.
”Unfortunately, some youths in present day Nigeria are not as proactive as youths of old.
”A lot of our youths are not interested in their rights or government policies that will affect their future.
”The youth need to be interested in governance. That is the difference. Nobody will be discriminated against, because the future belongs to them.
”They must stand up for their rights,” he said.
Also, a human rights lawyer and a Civil Society leader, Mr Malachy Ugwummadu, spoke on the role of the youth in promoting human rights and peace.
He said that Nigerian youths have the population to make the needed positive changes.
Ugwummadu, who described the youth population in Nigeria as a “critical mass” for a change, called on them to be knowledgeable about their rights and the laws of the country.
”We have a law: ‘Not too young to run’. They must know about it and other laws concerning them.
”One major challenge is the division among the youth. They must be united if they want to bring about any positive change.
”They must network across all ages and genders. They should improve on themselves, and collectively take up national issues,’’ he said.
Similarly, Mr Duke Amaliechi, the National Coordinator of Youth for Human Rights International, said that youths had a  great responsibility before them.
He said that was why the UN was advising them to stand up for their fundamental human rights.
Amaliechi said that there were lots of injustices going on in the society.
He  said that the youth should speak out against perceived injustices in the society  and  participate in governance.
He advised them not to become tools of crisis or destabilisation in the hands of politicians.
He said that only those with poor mindsets would collect money from people to kill fellow human beings or cause crises.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email
Continue Reading

Trending