Culpable Homicide: Supreme Court Faults Tinubu’s Pardon for Maryam Sanda
.Affirms death sentence
Alex Enumah in Abuja
The Supreme Court, yesterday, faulted the pardon granted by President Bola Tinubu to an Abuja-based house wife, Maryam Sanda, who was sentenced to death by hanging in 2020, for killing her husband, Billyaminu Bello.
The apex court in a majority judgement of four-to-one, held that the President was wrong in pardoning the convict while her appeal was still pending at the apex court.
Recall that the convict had approached the apex court to set aside the judgement of the Court of Appeal, which had affirmed the judgement of death by hanging, handed down by a High Court of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT).
Sanda was sentenced to death by Justice Yusuf Halilu of the FCT High Court on January 27, 2020, having found her guilty of culpable homicide.
Before the apex court could deliver judgement in Sanda’s appeal, President Tinubu in the exercise of his presidential powers of mercy, in October this year reduced Sanda’s sentence to 12 years imprisonment.
However, delivering judgement in the appeal yesterday, the apex court frowned at the conduct of the executive in granting pardon to a person who was yet to complete her court case.
Delivering the lead judgement, Justice Moore Adumein cited past decisions of both the Supreme Court and the Court of Appeal where the courts had shown strong disapproval to the act of the executive in granting pardon to a convict of a capital offence, while an appeal against the conviction was still pending.
Adumein stressed that the pardon granted Sanda by President Tinubu did not take away the court’s jurisdiction to hear and determine the appeal.
“By Section 233(2)(d) of the Constitution, the Supreme Court has jurisdiction to the exclusion of any other court, to hear and determine appeal from the Court of Appeal where, as in this case, a decision of a death sentence was affirmed.
“I do not think that this jurisdiction can be affected by the grant of pardon by the Executive when an appeal against the death sentence is still pending in the Supreme Court of Nigeria.
“When an appeal against death sentence is pending, it is better and safer to delay granting amnesty or pardon to the convicted person.
“The grant of pardon during the pendency of appeal does not prevent the court from proceeding to determine the appeal on the merit,” he said.
Meanwhile, the apex court went ahead to affirm the concurrent death sentence handed Sanda by both the Court of Appeal and trial court.
In arriving at the conclusion that Sanda’s case lacked merit, the apex court disagreed with her submissions that the case ought to have been commenced through an information and not a charge.
Justice Adumein pointed out that Section 100(d) of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA) 2015, provides that a criminal proceeding could be initiated or commenced by information or charge filed in court by the prosecuting authority as in this case.
The judge said, “If one may ask, how was the appellant adversely affected or prejudiced by the prosecuting authority filing a charge instead of an information.
“The appellant has not been able to show that the decisions of the two courts below were perverse because the criminal case was commenced by a charge and not an information,” he held.
“I agree with the respondent that this court has no reason to disturb the concurrent findings of the two lower courts,” Justice Adumein added.
Having resolved all the issues raised in the appeal against the appellant, Adumein held that, “this appeal is bereft of any merit and it is hereby dismissed.”
Justices Uwani Abba-Aji, Ibrahim Saulawa and Chidiebere Uwa agreed with the lead majority judgement, while Justice Emmanuel Agim dissented.
In his dissenting judgement, Justice Agim allowed the appeal and set aside Sanda’s conviction and sentence.
