PLIGHT OF PRE-TRIAL DETAINEES AND THE QUESTION OF ACCESS TO JUSTICE IN NIGERIA
Chapter one
Introduction
The police, State prosecutors from the office of the Attorney General and the courts are independently established agencies set up for the administration of justice. As far as criminal justice administration is concerned, these agencies work in collaboration with each other in bringing offenders to justice. The criminal justice system is structured in such a way that such collaboration and coordination between the agencies is indispensable for its optimal performance.
In reality, however, we find that due to lack of synchronization and several other reasons, the criminal justice system has performed below expectation. Such poor score sheet is noticeable in the monumental delays experienced in the system and the technical discharge of the accused in most cases.
In Nigeria, it is not surprising for a simple case of assault occasioning harm to last for years. Instances where cases have lasted between ten to fifteen years are legion. The cause of this delay could, apart from the delay in investigations, be either the prosecution or defence lawyer who is usually in the habit of seeking unmerited adjournments from courts mostly where he is not prepared to go on with the case or the court itself in a rare occasions. Although it is a principle of law that adjournments are not granted as a matter of right, the courts very often oblige lawyers when they apply for adjournment of cases, sometimes on very flimsy reasons. Unfortunately, this practice has also robbed off on Judges and Magistrates many of whom are commonly seen arriving courts very late or failing to come to Court for some days without any extenuating or compelling reasons. The cumulative effect of this is that litigants continue to groan under this debilitating scenario of undue delays in the dispensation of justice. Accordingly, this “slow motion judicial process” has adverse effect on the quest for the quick dispensation of criminal justice in Nigeria.
The Nigerian prisons houses different categories of inmates, amongst the most prominent are the convicted and the pre trial inmates. It is no gainsaying that a good percentage of our prison inmates are on the pre trial list. As at march 2016, out of the total number of prison inmates in Nigerian prisons put at 61,527 inmates, 43, 864 are pre trial, or un-convicted as the reports referred to them, that is 71% of the total number of inmates[1]. This second category of prison inmates can be further broken down into those whose trials are actually on-going and those whose trials are comatose albeit not convicted. At least for those whose trials are on gong there is hope, in that whatever may be the case their trial will not go on forever, and they retain the option of appeal if convicted.
Remand has become a popular word in the Nigerian Criminal Justice System. Among many, the belief is that remand is ordered simply when criminal matters for which the magistrates court lacks jurisdiction are brought before them, and of course such magistrates have to decline jurisdiction and ultimately remand such persons brought before it in the prison, as they await the advice of the Director of Public Prosecution for trial in the High Court or for their discharge. Olisa Agbakoba defined it thus:
This is a system of bringing an accused before an inferior court that lacks jurisdiction to try him or her for the primary purpose of securing a remand order and thereafter abandon him or her in prison under the pretense of pre trial.[2]
Unfortunately, the process described above also known as holding charge only refers to one incidence of remand and conveniently leaves out others. According to Y.D.U HAMBALI[3]
“Holding charge is a practice whereby a suspect undergoing investigation is taken to a magistrate’s court under a phoney or miniature charge by the police with the view to moving the court to order the remand of the suspect pending conclusion of the investigation into the matter and on conclusion of the investigation the suspect is formerly arraigned under a proper charge before the court with jurisdiction while the phoney or miniature charge with which the suspect was remanded is withdrawn”
Unsurprisingly, the term Remand has been the most blamed for the alarming rise of pre trial inmates, the popular thought on the meaning and process of remand reflects this. In-fact one writer puts them together as a single category of the inmates in Nigerian prisons.[4] It is erroneously believed that most of the pre trial inmates are in prison because they were remanded and that they were remanded because they were charged before inferior courts (excluding those whose trials are on-going.) This is grossly untrue, the analysis is wrong, even a superficial and effortless legal thought will reveal this. Now consider the case where a magistrate does not rule immediately on an application for bail but adjourns to a future date and consequently detains/remands the defendant.
Statement of problem
The problems are compounded by the elitist nature of the Nigerian courts, which, instead of advocating the philosophy of simplified proceeding, complicate matters with technicalities, and adversarial proceedings that leaves the suspect frustrated, scared and confused. In line with protocol, Adeyemi (1972) reports that detainees being prosecuted are not expected to do certain things while the court is in session. For example, it is unlawful to smile, laugh or ask questions in court; it is even an offense to yawn or whisper, cough, sneeze or blow their noses at will; detainees cannot freely move. These manifestations culminate into human rights violations with effects on detainees.
As a result of the problems permeating the criminal justice agencies, human rights situation in Nigeria is often perceived to be in a chaotic state. In the opinion of Ikhriale (1994:89) “…an accused person in Nigeria is so easily denied his basic constitutional rights at various stages of the criminal justice process. It has reached the extent that most people have come to take it for granted that discussions about the rights of the accused are more or less societal luxury. The discussion could be kept aside until more material and other needs are met.” A lot of print media reports that are viewed as sensational and episodic have indicated the uncharitable state of the human rights situation in Nigeria (see Tribune, No.1129, September 6, 1998, West Africa, 1997 February 10-16). As pointed out by Adeyemi (1989:5):Even though the laws of most African countries contain substantive and procedural provisions providing safeguards guaranteeing observance of human rights, yet their law enforcement officials, on occasions, do violate these rights. The prison system still suffers from lack of foodstuff, from poor health and sanitation conditions. And suffers… from absence of any clear idea of the purpose of prisons. The death rate in some of the government prisons was so high… There was no provision for quarantine facilities for infected prisoners….Indeed, provisions were not made for the segregation of criminal lunatics from other prisoners.The above is corroborated by a respondent’s view in a study of Nigerian prisons that the deplorable condition of detainees on remand is more the result of in-built structural constrains such as their ambivalent status, over-crowding, long stay and inadequate resources (Ajomo and Okagbue, 1991:149). It has been revealed that majority of the prison population in Nigeria (67%) is awaiting trial, and these are in the main not very serious criminals (see Tribune, No.1129, September 6, 1998, West Africa, 1997 February 10-16). This is seen as a problem that needs attention. This is especially because in some countries like America, efforts have been made to decriminalize certain minor offences like vagrancy, and the brewing of liquor. In other parts of the world [especially Europe], Police have been given a number of discretionary powers not to pursue certain trivial cases. These measures are believed to save money in all agencies within the justice system.As a result of prolonged detention, the sexual desire of the detainees is often provoked. A lot of reports have indicated the indulgence of prison inmates into indiscriminate homosexual practices (see CLO, 1990). Thus, there are now higher chances of AIDS infection by prisoners (including awaiting trials) who engage in homosexuality.To forestall the problems of the judiciary, Justice Kayode Eso Panel was put in place to examine, inter alia “…the negative public perception of the Nigerian judiciary as exemplified by complaints/allegations of polarization of the judicial system along ethnic, tribal and/or political leanings; corruption and high profile lifestyle of some judges; ineptitude, laziness and incompetence of judges; long period of time in disposition of cases; ridiculously high cost of obtaining justice; mode of appointment of judges, which does not facilitate the appointment of the right caliber of judges into the service; and the terms and conditions of service of the judges.[5] Furthermore, due to the shortcomings of the system, scholars like Odekunle (2000) advocates de-institutionalized methods of punishing offenders by employing alternative ways like compensation in cash and/or kind, reconciliation/restoration, community service/labor, probation, suspended sentence, furlough, etc. It is also, argued that where offenders are publicly shamed, made to return stolen items, nurse their victim to good health deterrence may be more assured than imprisonment and these methods were used in pre-colonial Nigeria, and were efficient and effective (Odekunle, 2000).
There is an assumed inefficiency and ineffectiveness within the criminal justice agencies resulting in prolonged detention awaiting trial which stem from the general neglect of the justice system. There are indications that verbal and physical abuse, and economic losses represent the nature, extent and types of human rights violations detainees encounter while on remand. By and large, the socioeconomic correlates of the victims of abuse show that they are poor, unemployed people with low literacy level remanded in a foreign and judicially technical system that marginalizes them in a costly fashion due to its capitalistic nature.
Objective of the study
The broad objective of this research is to examine Plight Of Pre-Trial Detainees And The Question Of Access To Justice In Nigeria.
- Determine the nature, extent and types of human rights violations detainees awaiting trial experienced within the criminal justice system in Nigeria
- Examine factors sustaining high prevalence of pre-trial detention
3. Examine the causes of Delay in Criminal Justice Administration and Access to Justice in Civil Justice System.
[1] Source: SUMMARY OF NIGERIAN PRISON STATISTICS AS AT MARCH 2016, pg. 19 PRACTICAL STEPS TO REFORMS OF THE ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE IN NIGERIA , publication of the Administration of Criminal Justice Committee April 2016
[2] Olisa Agbakogba, “Criminal Justice Reform and The Challenge of Holding Charge.” p.3 available at
[3] Y.D.U Hambali “Practice and Procedure of Criminal Litigation in Nigeria,” Lagos Nigeria (2013) pg. 540
[4] Dr. Uju Agomoh, “Prison Decongestion and Reforms in Nigeria – Issues and Methods” accessed on the 10th of October 2016
[5] See National Concord of Monday, January 10, 1994, p.4
DOWNLOAD COMPLETE PROJECT MATERIAL
PLIGHT OF PRE-TRIAL DETAINEES AND THE QUESTION OF ACCESS TO JUSTICE IN NIGERIA
