The Supreme Court has unanimously affirmed the conviction and sentencing of a kidnapping suspect, reinforcing the judiciary’s stance against the surge of abduction-related crimes across Nigeria.
The apex court dismissed the appeal in Okere v. State, upholding the death penalty handed down to the appellant for his role in a kidnapping ring operating in Anambra State.
The appellant was originally charged alongside three accomplices before the High Court of Anambra State on a five-count charge, including conspiracy to commit kidnapping, kidnapping, unlawful imprisonment, and the unlawful demand for ransom.
During the trial, the prosecution presented a compelling case, featuring five witnesses. Among them was the victim (PW2), who provided a harrowing account of her abduction. Furthermore, investigators (PW5) utilised tracking technology to arrest a co-conspirator, who confessed that the operation was carried out by a five-man gang that included the appellant.
Crucially, the trial court admitted two confessional statements from the appellant, marked as exhibits “K” and “K1.” Notably, the defence raised no objection when these documents were initially tendered. Although the appellant later attempted to retract these confessions during his own testimony, the trial court found his retraction to be an “afterthought” and maintained the validity of the evidence.
In its judgment, the Supreme Court clarified the legal thresholds for proving guilt in such cases. The court reiterated that a conviction can be secured through voluntary confessions, credible eyewitness testimony, or circumstantial evidence.
Regarding the retracted confession, the justices emphasised that simply retracting a statement does not render it unreliable.
“The confessional statement of an accused person, where it is found to be voluntary and unequivocal, provides the best evidence of his guilt,” the court noted, adding that courts must apply rigorous tests to confirm the truthfulness of such statements, including verifying if the confession is corroborated by outside facts, which it was in this instance through the victim’s testimony.
Following the dismissal of the appeal, the court issued a stern rebuke regarding the state of insecurity in the nation. Justice Adah, J.S.C., highlighted the devastating impact of these crimes on the social fabric of the country.
“Permit me, my brothers, to decry the disturbing and alarming rate of kidnapping in our country,” Justice Adah stated in his concurring opinion. “Kidnapping is a gross violation of an individual’s rights to liberty, dignity and life… All hands must therefore be on the deck to apply strict legal sanctions to stamp out this evil called kidnapping.”
The Supreme Court concluded that because the appellant failed to demonstrate any fundamental errors in the concurrent findings of the trial court and the Court of Appeal, there was no legal justification to interfere with the sentencing.
The appellant now faces the full weight of the initial judgment, which includes seven years for conspiracy, life imprisonment for unlawful imprisonment, and death sentences for the kidnapping-related charges.
