By: Adenike Kaothara Lawal 

In a landmark ruling, the Supreme Court of Nigeria has established that law enforcement agencies must electronically record a suspect’s confessional statement in an audio-visual format during criminal investigations. The case of Federal Republic of Nigeria (F.R.N.) v. Akaeze [2024] 12 NWLR (Pt. 1951) 1 has underscored the mandatory nature of this requirement, in accordance with sections 15(4) and 17(1) & (2) of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act 2015 (ACJA). This decision leaves no room for discretion—failure to comply renders the confessional statement inadmissible in court.

This judgment builds on the precedent set by the Supreme Court in Friday Charles v. The State of Lagos (2023) 13 NWLR (Pt. 1901) 213, which similarly dealt with the recording of confessional statements. Both cases highlight the court’s commitment to ensuring that suspects’ constitutional rights are upheld during criminal proceedings.

Section 15(4) of the ACJA 2015, which mirrors section 9(3) of the Administration of Criminal Justice Law of Lagos State 2011 (ACJL), is particularly crucial in this ruling. The law mandates that, if a suspect voluntarily offers a confessional statement during arrest (whether with or without a warrant), the police must ensure that the statement is documented in writing and recorded electronically, either on a compact disc or via other audio-visual means.

Furthermore, section 17(2) of the ACJA 2015 provides additional protections by stipulating that a suspect’s statement may be taken in the presence of a legal practitioner or, in the absence of one, other authorized individuals such as a representative of the Legal Aid Council of Nigeria or a civil society organization. These provisions ensure that suspects are not coerced into making confessions and that the process is transparent and fair.

Justice Ogunwumiju, who concurred with the lead judgment in the Akaeze case, emphasized the significance of the use of “shall” in these provisions, signaling their mandatory nature. According to the judgment, the objective of electronically recording confessional statements is to prevent scenarios where suspects are forced or coerced into confessing, thereby avoiding miscarriages of justice. The ruling is aimed at minimizing the number of confessions that are later retracted and reducing the need for a trial within a trial, where the court determines the admissibility of the confessional statement.

The law serves as a safeguard against torture or undue pressure on suspects and promotes fairness in Nigeria’s criminal justice system. By making this practice mandatory, the court seeks to ensure that the rights of defendants, as enshrined in section 35(2) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, are fully protected.

In Nigerian law, confessions are considered powerful pieces of evidence. According to Section 28 of the Evidence Act 2011, a confession is defined as “an admission made at any time by a person charged with a crime, stating or suggesting that he committed the crime.” Section 29(1) of the same Act further clarifies that a confession may be admitted as evidence against a defendant, provided it is relevant and not excluded by the court.

Because confessions carry significant weight in legal proceedings, a person can be convicted based solely on their confession, provided the court is convinced that it was made voluntarily and without contradictions. However, as the Supreme Court’s ruling highlights, the admissibility of such confessions hinges on their compliance with the provisions of the ACJA, particularly the requirement for electronic recording.

The ruling has also addressed concerns about legal loopholes that could allow for coercion or improper handling of confessional statements. Previously, confessions obtained without proper documentation or oversight could be challenged, leading to delays in the legal process and undermining the integrity of the case. With the new ruling, law enforcement agencies are expected to adhere strictly to the guidelines laid out in the ACJA.

The Supreme Court has also clarified that challenges to the admissibility of a confessional statement must occur at the point of introduction during trial. The prosecution must demonstrate that the confession was obtained in compliance with section 15(4) of the ACJA. This clarity strengthens the prosecution’s case, as it removes doubts surrounding the voluntariness of a suspect’s statement and ensures that confessions are presented transparently.

The Supreme Court’s decision has several significant implications for the Nigerian criminal justice system:

1. Compliance with Statutory Law: Law enforcement agencies are now legally obligated to comply with the requirements of the ACJA, which strengthens procedural transparency and ensures that suspects’ rights are protected throughout the investigation process.

2. Minimization of Trial Within a Trial: The ruling is designed to prevent unnecessary “trial within trial” proceedings, which often arise when the admissibility of a confessional statement is contested. By mandating electronic recording, the court ensures that confessions are clear, transparent, and beyond reproach.

3. Elimination of Doubt: The new procedures eliminate any doubts about the voluntariness of a confession. By electronically recording statements, law enforcement agencies provide a clear record of the circumstances under which a confession was made, reducing the likelihood of disputes in court.

4. Court Efficiency: The Supreme Court’s ruling also saves valuable court time by streamlining the process. Cases are less likely to be delayed due to questions about the admissibility of confessional statements, ensuring that justice is served more swiftly.

5. Strengthened Prosecution: Finally, the ruling strengthens the evidence presented by the prosecution, as the use of audio-visual recordings makes the case more direct and less open to challenge.

The Supreme Court’s ruling sets a clear legal standard for the handling of confessional statements, but questions remain about how it will be implemented in practice. While the ruling mandates that confessions must be electronically recorded, section 15(5) of the ACJA still allows for the admissibility of oral confessions, which could lead to future challenges if the proper procedures are not followed.

As the Nigerian legal system continues to evolve, the F.R.N. v. Akaeze decision will serve as a critical reference point in safeguarding the rights of criminal suspects and promoting transparency in law enforcement. It marks a step forward in ensuring that confessions are obtained lawfully and that the integrity of the criminal justice system is maintained.