WONAKA V. SOKOTO NATIVE AUTHORITY

• Pages: 28-31

28

NIGERIAN SUPREME COURT CASES

[1956] N.S.C.C.

At the hearing of the further appeal to this Court the main ground of complaint

was that the appellant was not given an opportunity of calling witnesses to sub-

stantiate his defence which was an alibi.

Counsel for the appellant admitted that the point was not taken at the hearing

of the appeal before the High Court, as it clearly ought to have been. However,

since this is an appeal in a capital case we allowed it to be taken before us.

There is nothing in the record of the proceedings before the Emir's Court indi-

cating that the appellant was asked if he had any witnesses he wished to call in

support of his alibi. Before us he stated that he had such witnesses, and gave their

names and the locality in which he alleged they could be found.

In cases such as this the accused should always be asked if he has any wit-

nesses he wishes to call in support of his defence, and it is obviously desirable

that care should be taken by the trial Court to ensure that the question and answer

are recorded.

In the circumstances we are of the opinion that the justice of this case demands

1

that there should be a hearing

δε νοϖο.

We accordingly allow this appeal, set aside the verdict and sentence of the trial

Court, and remit the case to the Court of the Emir of Kano, Grade A, for trial

de

novo,

if

possible before a different panel of "Court Members".

Appeal allowed.

Re-trial ordered.

2

WONAKA V. SOKOTO NATIVE AUTHORITY

2:

IDI WONAKA

APPELLANT

V

SOKOTO NATIVE AUTHORITY

RESPONDENT

3t

SUIT NO. FSC 34/1956

FEDERAL SUPREME COURT

FOSTER SUTTON, F.C.J.

JIBOWU,

F.J.

ABBOTT,

Ag, F.J.

3f

20th April, 1956.

Χριµιναλ Λαω− Μυρδερ − Τριαλ Νατιϖε χουρτ Νορτηερν Ρεγιον Μαλικι Λαω

αδµινιστερεδ − προϖοχατιον − εφφεχτ ον ωιλφυλ ηοµιχιδε − προοφ οφ ρετραχτεδ

χονφεσσιον − προϖοχατιον υνδερ Ενγλιση Λαω − ινστρυµεντ υσεδ.

ISSUE:

1. When is provocation insufficient to reduce Murder to Manslaughter.

FACTS:

The appellant was convicted by the Grade A Court of the Sultan of Sokoto. His

4E,

appeal to the High Court was dismissed.

The only point argued by the appellants Counsel was that there had been suf-

ficient evidence of provocation to reduce the offence from Murder to Man-

slaughter.

The Law administered in the Sultan's Court was Maliki Law, and in their judg-

50

ment the Court considered first whether the conviction was in accordance with

Moslem Law, and held that it was. The Court then, however, further went on to

consider whether there would have been in this case sufficient provocation in Eng-

lish Law to have reduced the offences from Murder to manslaughter.