Defence Of Justification

Justification in jurisprudence is an exception to the prohibition of committing certain offences.
Justification can be a defence in a prosecution for a criminal offence. When an act is justified, a person is not criminally liable even though their act would otherwise constitute an offence. For example, to intentionally commit a homicide would be considered murder. But it is not considered as a crime if committed in self defence.
According to Blacks law dictionary; “justification is maintaining or showing a sufficient reason in court why the defendant did what he is called upon to answer, particularly in an action of libel. A defence of justification is a defence showing the libel to be true, or in an action of assault showing the violence to have been necessary.
The reasoning for the defence of justification, is that a man should not be allowed to recover damages in respect of an injury to a character he does not possess. It is trite that the defence of justification is a complete defence in a case of libel. Once the words published of and concerning  the respondent are in essence the truth, the fact that thy are defamatory of the person of whom they are made will not entitle such a person to damages. The defence of justification under the common law can be foisted by showing the truth of the material contained in the libel. To sustain such a defence the defendant has to, in the trial court substantially justify the libel on everything contained in the libel injurious to the appellant  per Mohammed J.C.A in Obasuyi V. Ezeighu (1991) 3 NWLR (Pt 181) 585  591 (p 29, Para E.G).
In Annabi v The state (2008) vol.160 LRCN the appellant received information that someone had abused Prophet Mohammed together with some others went to confirm the truthfulness of the information, and on the confirmamation of the stay, they caused the death of the deceased by slaughtering him with a knife, pleading the defence of justification. It was held that the availability of any defence to an accused person is a matter of fact and law, not speculation. Therefore when a person alleges an appeal that certain defences are available to him, it is his duty to prove same by reference to the evidence on record which if accepted by the court will establish the existence of such defence.
The condition to be satisfied before the defence of justification can avail an accused is set out by section 45 of the penal code as it reads:
Nothing is an offence which is done by any person who is justified by law, or who by reason of a mistake of fact and not by reason of a mistake of law, in good faith believes himself to be justified by law in doing it.
But in the above case, there is nothing in the entire record of proceedings that reveals that the appellant was justified by law in taking part in the killing of the deceased. They acted on rumours, and even if the rumours were authenticated, the grave action they took was not justified. So they were not given the benefit of the defence of justification.

Nkechi Bright Ewere