REVISTING THE EFFECT OF NON-COMPLIANCE WITH SECTION 9(3) OF THE ADMINISTRATION OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE (REPEAL AND RE-ENACTMENT) LAW OF LAGOS STATE 2011: KADIRI V THE STATE OF LAGOS IN FOCUS

Abstract

Confessional statements obtained at the point of investigation have remained the best evidence relied on by prosecutorial agencies in proving the guilt or otherwise of an accused person. Challenges associated with the process of obtaining extra-judicial statements have propelled the enactments of significant laws to eliminate abuses inherent in the practice, and to regulate the admissibility of same during trial. The Evidence Act 2011, being the primary law that regulates the admissibility of evidence in Nigerian courts provides for conditions to be fulfilled by such statement to be admissible – the most fundamental being that it must have been obtained voluntarily. Legally, the burden is fixed on the prosecution to prove the voluntariness of such statement, where it is in dispute. The Administration of Criminal Justice (Repeal and Re-enactment) Law, 2011 of Lagos State is a landmark legislation intended to streamline these issues. This paper explores the admissibility of confessional statements under the Evidence Act, the scope of the provisions of section 9(3) of the Administration of Criminal Justice Law of Lagos state and the effect of non-compliance with the provisions on admissibility of such statements. In addition, the twist introduced in the case of Kadiri v The State of Lagos will be examined side by side other decisions of the appellate courts that appear to be in conflict with that decision. It is our finding that the position of the law before the decision in Kadiri is preferable.