THE PRESUMPTION OF INNOCENCE IN NIGERIA’S CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM
By Comrade Musa Ali Maishanu
“Nigeria is oriented towards due process through reactive response, not crime control via proactive approach.”
However, in Nigeria, a defendant is presumed to be innocent, not guilty until proved guilty as in the U.S. criminal justice system. While, in China the entire system of criminal justice system is oriented towards crime control,not due to process. Moreover, in China for instance, a defendant is presumed to be guilty, not innocent until proved guilty as in Nigeria and U. S. at large. Before appearing in court, the defendant would have been scrutinised already by a work unit, neighbourhood committee, or neighbourhood district. If these bodies cannot correct the defendant’s outlook or behavior, they would refer the case to the control committee, which can either assign a punishment or refer the case to the courts. If a case is referred to the courts by the control committee, it is presumed that the offender is guilty and that some punishment is warranted in China. The court appearance in China under its system of crime control is likely to be just a sentencing hearing as evidenced by the fact approximately 99 percent of persons whose cases on crimes are heard by the Supreme People’s Court (SPC)are convicted, the court system in China allows only one such appeal. Whereas, in Nigeria and U. S. of America convicted individuals can appeal more than one.
In theory, a defendant in Nigeria and U. S. of America is assumed innocent until proved guilty; the burden of proving guilt rests with the prosecution. While, in China it rests with the control committee. Furthermore. defendants have a right to a jury trial, meaning that a jury of their peers decides their fate in Nigeria and America. In practice, however, 95 percent of all felony convictions in Nigeria are settled through plea bargains, not jury trials. On the other hand, in China 95 percent of all felony convictions are products of unsettled through plea bargains. A plea bargain means that the defendant agrees to be reduced sentence in exchange for a guilty plea. In Nigeria and America under a due process not toward crime control, sentences and punishments can be reduced through plea bargaining, shock probation (sudden and unexpected release from prison), or a plea of insanity or self-defense against felony offenders. But in China felony convicts must pay for the price of their criminal networks.
In addition, in Nigeria under an existing system of due process defendants who can afford the fees are able to purchase the best legal defense and thus have the greatest chance of being found innocent or receiving lighter sentences. While, those who cannot afford the fees can never purchase the best legal defense and thus have the less chance of being found innocent or receiving lighter sentences.
Furthermore, the role of lawyers in Nigeria and America have dramatically reflected the basic differences between Chinese and Nigerian views on how defendants should be handled by the criminal justice system. In China, lawyers or legal practitioners are paid by the state and must remit any fees to the state. Although, lawyers or legal practitioners in China are trained to protect legitimate rights of clients, those rights are secondary to the rights and interests of the state and people. In addition, lawyers or legal practitioners in China cannot use the impression management strategies (IMS) that Nigerian and American lawyers employ while defending their client in court to convince a jury of a client’s innocence when, in fact, the client is guilty. If Chinese legal practitioners or lawyers followed such techniques, they would be accused of conspiring with an enemy of the state. While, in Nigeria therefore, impression management strategies (IMS) are tools of defense by legal practitioners.
Comrade Musa Ali Maishanu, writes from Gombe State, he is a certified Criminologist and Security Professional.
