3PLR – ADEBOWALE ALONGE V. THE ATTORNEY GENERAL, WESTERN NIGERIA

POLICY, PRACTICE AND PUBLISHING, LAW REPORTS  3PLR

[PDF copy of this judgment can be sent to your email for N300 only. Just order through lawnigeria@gmail.com and info@lawnigeria.com or text 07067102097]

ADEBOWALE ALONGE

V.

THE ATTORNEY GENERAL, WESTERN NIGERIA

SUPREME COURT OF NIGERIA

20TH MARCH 1964

(S.C. 3111964; WN.)

3PLR/1964/10  (SC)

OTHER CITATIONS

BEFORE:

BRETT, J.S.C. (delivered the judgment of the Court)

REPRESENTATION

J. A. COLE, for appellant.

C.O. O. BADA, Senior State Counsel, for respondent.

MAIN ISSUES

CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE: – Appeals in Criminal Cases – Miscarriage of justice; case where none proved

CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE: – Homicide – Murder fuelled by belief in witchcraft caused by oath taken to fend off accusation of adultery with deceased person – Provocation – Words can be provocation

RELIGION AND LAW: – Trial by ordeal – Proof of innocence of adultery with married woman through oath taking – Belief that false oath-taking afflicts offender with illness – Implication for justice administration

HEALTHCARE AND LAW: – Sicknesses and association with customary beliefs and practices – Implication for access policies

INTERPRETATION OF STATUTE: – Federal Criminal Code, s.283; Western Nigeria Criminal Code, s.220

CHILDREN AND WOMEN LAW: – Women and Murder – Killing of a married woman by past lover – Oath-taking as proof of innocence against charge of adultery with married woman – Belief that illness of accused person was caused by oath taken to deny charge of adultery by deceased’s husband – Whether deceased person’s saying to accused “You’ve had it” amounted to provocation – Attitude of Court

MAIN JUDGMENT

BRETT, J.S.C. (delivering the judgment of the Court).-

The appellant was convicted of the murder of a woman named Jose Akintade, who was the wife of Akintade Omoye. It would appear that the appellant was in love with Jose and that Jose’s husband had discovered that the two had been committing adultery. The appellant was taxed with this and there was a threat of an action in court. According to the appellant, he was made to swear an oath that he had not committed adultery with Jose and after swearing it he became ill.

On the evening of the 8th April, 1963, Jose and three other women were returning to Akure from their farm. They were walking in single file and Jose was at the back. They met the appellant who was coming from the direction of Akure and he greeted the women in front. Soon after this they heard shouts and on looking back saw the appellant attacking Jose with a matchet. Her body was found later lying on the ground and the cause of death was a deep laceration on the back of the neck which nearly separated the head from the neck.

The appellant made a statement under caution in which he said that it had been certain that he himself would die and that he determined to kill Jose before he died; that he followed her and killed her with a matchet. In his evidence at the trial he said that he met Jose on the road on the day she died, that he said nothing to her but she said to him “You’ve had it”, by which he knew she was referring to his illness. He was annoyed and so attacked her with his matchet. It was submitted in the court of trial that these words constituted sufficient provocation to reduce the offence from murder to manslaughter. The Judge rejected this submission and quoted from the judgment of Ridley, J. in R. v. Mason 8 Cr. App. R. 121, where it was said that “mere words of provocation or abuse could not…. have the effect of reducing the crime from murder to manslaughter’. It is now settled that this statement does not represent the law under section 220 of the Criminal Code of Western Nigeria (section 283 in the Federal Code) which expressly defines provocation as including any wrongful act or insult; but we agree with the learned trial Judge that the words used in this case were not such as to constitute sufficient provocation to reduce the crime from murder to manslaughter. In these circumstances, the appeal was dismissed.