The recent conviction of Nwabufor Echezona and Ezike Ikechukwu Olisaeloka, for the murder of Cynthia Osokugo, by Justice Olabisi Akinlade of the High Court of Lagos State, is a fitting denouement for the duo. This is without prejudice to their right of appeal. Now, the spirit of Cynthia is pacified, while the sympathetic public and the agonising parents of the delectable beauty, mercilessly murdered, can at least repose some confidence in our criminal justice system, even though it took five years to secure their conviction.
The other two accused persons, Pharmacists Orji Osita and Maduakor Chukwunonso, were discharged and acquitted by the court. While they may be celebrating their freedom, I guess they will also be appalled by the criminal justice system that dragged them through a trial, which many had argued was overkill. Even while we appreciate the efforts that brought the murderers to their comeuppance, it is also important to examine the efficiency of the process.
To gift us a better society, state governments should audit the processes involved in police investigation; review the experience of the relevant officials and the standards used to weigh the proof of evidence in the office of the Director of Public Prosecution before they decide to prosecute. Even without asking for a standard beyond reasonableness, such an audit would save many of those languishing in jail across the country, and also state resources.
For me, it is also important for our country to begin to contemplate a more efficient criminal justice system, different from the current inefficient one. Considering the improvements already made by the Lagos State government in its laws, compared with other states of the federation, is it not worrisome that a criminal trial could take five years; and that those who had no link with a murder, could be subjugated to the horror of defending a murder charge for that long?
This column on September 4, 2012, wrote on: “Convicting the murderers of Cynthia Osokugo.” At the risk of sounding impetuous, my argument then substantially falls on all fours, with the recent judgment. With a slight amendment, I represent my arguments:
“The absolutely senseless Facebook-related murder of Miss Cynthia Osokugo around Festac Town, Lagos, once again portrays the moral abyss that many youths have sunk into. Reading through the newspapers’ account of the police report, one is appalled by the callous indignity and scurrilous imbecility exhibited by Nwabufor Echezona (33) and Ezike Ikechukwu Olisaeloka (23), who reportedly confessed to the murder of that beautiful young woman. But while we mourn Cynthia, the society will be better off, if the culprits receive their comeuppance. Also it is important that Pharmacists Orji Osita and Maduakor Chukwunonso are not unfairly charged together with the confessed murderers. But I will come to that…
It is also encouraging that the often vilified Nigerian police moved quickly on this murder case, at least to the extent of nabbing the confessed murderers. But it must be borne in mind by the prosecuting authority that getting the accused persons charged to court, and getting them convicted for culpable homicide does not inviolably follow as a sequence. The prosecution must proffer hard core evidence to prove their case, and the courts are never in a hurry to convict, where there exists any iota of doubt. Notably, the prosecution is made up of the investigation and prosecution in court. So, if the first is messed up, then the second will not succeed as matter of course, and that is why the proof of evidence must contain only hard core evidence, not unnecessary emotional baggage.
Reading through some of the reported police charges, it seems they were couched to secure the maximum custody of all the accused persons, regardless of the actual cause of Cynthia’s death; and this may harm the prosecution. In Lori vs The State, 1ACLC at page 217, the Supreme Court, per Nnamani JSC, held: “In a charge of murder the cause of death of the deceased must be established unequivocally and the burden rests on the prosecution to establish this and if they fail the accused must be discharged. It is also settled law that the accused or put differently, it must be shown that the deceased died as a result of the act of the accused”. Also in Uguru vs The State, 2002 FWLR at page, per Uwaifo JSC, the SC held: “The burden on the prosecution is to prove not only that the act of the accused could have caused the death of the deceased but that it certainly did. If there is the possibility that the deceased died from other causes than the act of the accused, the prosecution has not established the case against the accused.”
In Cynthia’s case, both the confessed felons and the pharmacists whose alleged complicity was that they sold ‘Rohypnol Flunitrazepam tablets (used to treat short-term insomnia) over the counter without prescription were all charged for the murder. The police must have been in a hurry to be seen to have performed, otherwise how they can conscientiously also charge Maduakor whose offence is that he merely sold the same drug to an undercover police officer, long after the murder of Cynthia had taken place, for complicity in the murder? Now if the police bothered to find out what the drug Rohypnol Flunitrazepam is, as clearly explained by the Pharmaceutical Society of Nigeria (PSN), then unless there are other acts of complicity to ground conspiracy, charging Osita who allegedly sold the drugs to the confessed felons for the offence of murder, instead of dragging him to the Pharmaceutical Society for breach of professional ethics, is preposterous.
That perhaps explains why PSN is protesting against the charges, stating that the sale of prescription drugs over the counter is a mere professional misconduct, and cannot rightly be ascribed to murder or even a conspiracy for murder. And they are right. In Njovens vs The State 1 ACLC at page 290; the Supreme Court held: “The overt act or omission which evidences conspiracy is the actus reus and the actus reus of each and every conspiracy must be referable and very often is the only proof of criminal agreement which is called conspiracy. It is not necessary to prove that the conspirators like those who murdered Julius Caesar, were seen together …. They need not all have started the conspiracy at the same time … the gist of this offence of conspiracy is the meeting of the mind of the conspirators …. Hence conspiracy is a matter of inference from certain criminal acts of the parties’ concerned done in pursuance or an apparent criminal purpose in common between them….” Is the alleged sale of Rohypnol such common purpose?
Again the charge for armed robbery, against the two confessed felons and the pharmacists is mere distraction. If the two real culprits took Cynthia’s belongings after murdering her; stealing will be more appropriate…”
