Background
Abdulkarim Mohammed, the fifth accused among fifteen defendants, was arraigned at the Federal High Court, Jos Judicial Division, on three counts: (1) conspiracy to commit terrorist acts in Jos and environs; (2) illegal possession of firearms (seven locally made guns) without valid licence; and (3) committing terrorist acts in Kadunu Village while armed with dangerous weapons (machetes, knives, bows & arrows, slings, axes). He pleaded not guilty. The prosecution led five witnesses, tendered weapons and the accused’s extra‐judicial statements. The defence called one community leader; the accused did not testify. The trial court found the prosecution’s evidence cogent and credible, convicted the appellant on all counts, and sentenced him to terms of two years, one year, and ten years’ imprisonment respectively, without the option of fine.
On appeal to the Court of Appeal (Jos Division), the appellant’s eight grounds were distilled into two issues: proof of terrorist offences and proof of illegal firearm possession. That court affirmed the trial court’s findings, dismissing the appeal. The appellant then appealed to the Supreme Court, filing amended notices and briefs, ultimately formulating four issues for determination.
Issues
- Whether reliance on the appellant’s extra‐judicial statement (Exhibit A4) was lawful and whether objection was required to challenge it.
- Whether the prosecution proved illegal possession of firearms against the appellant beyond reasonable doubt.
- Whether convictions on counts one and two were under the correct statute and penalty.
- Whether a conviction delivered in the appellant’s absence occasioned a miscarriage of justice.
Ratio Decidendi
The Supreme Court reaffirmed several key principles:
- An appeal is a continuation of the trial and is confined to issues raised and decided below. New issues require leave to raise fresh points.
- Issues must arise from, be predicated upon, and directed at the ratio decidendi of the lower court’s judgment; extraneous issues are incompetent and struck out.
- The offence of illegal possession of firearms is a strict liability offence: proof of possession without a valid licence suffices, regardless of ownership or intent.
- A person cannot be convicted of firearm possession by mere association; actual or joint control/possession must be established.
Court Findings
The Supreme Court carefully reviewed the four issues:
- Extra‐judicial statement: The appellant’s counsel had relied on the statement at trial and on appeal, without objection. Failure to object constitutes agreement and renders complaints on appeal afterthoughts. Issue 1 was therefore discountenanced.
- Illegal firearm possession: Prosecution witnesses attributed to the appellant only a sling and a life jacket with charms—neither falls within the Firearms Act definition of a "firearm." No evidence showed joint possession of the locally made guns. The lower courts’ findings were perverse and were set aside. The appellant was discharged and acquitted on this count.
- Wrong section/penalty and miscarriage of justice: These issues were neither raised nor argued in the lower courts, and no leave was sought to introduce fresh issues. They were struck out as incompetent.
Conclusion
The Supreme Court allowed the appeal in part. It set aside the convictions and sentences for illegal possession of firearms at both trial and appellate levels and acquitted the appellant on that count. Convictions and sentences for conspiracy to commit terrorist acts and for committing terrorist acts in Kadunu Village were affirmed.
Significance
This decision underscores:
- The necessity for consistency in issues raised from trial through appeal, and the strict requirement for leave to introduce fresh issues.
- The principle that an appellate court is bound by the printed record and the lower court’s ratio decidendi.
- The strict liability nature of illegal firearm possession: absence of licence and actual possession are determinative.
- The critical distinction between mere company of a firearm‐carrier and actual possession for criminal liability.