Abstract

BADEJOGBIN, Oluwatoyin. Onuoha Kalu v The State and flaws in Nigeria's death penalty jurisprudence. Afr. hum. rights law j. [online]. 2018, vol.18, n.2, pp.551-578. ISSN 1996-2096.  http://dx.doi.org/10.17159/1996-2096/2018/v18n2a6.

In Onuoha Kalu v The State, the Supreme Court of Nigeria affirmed that the death penalty violated neither the right to life nor human dignity under the Nigerian Constitution. Since the decision, the list of capital crimes has grown in Nigeria. In the last decade and more, not less than eight Nigerian states made kidnapping a capital offence, while 12 others adopted Shari'a criminal codes that extend capital punishment to sexual offences. Although executions have been rare, courts have continued to impose the mandatory death penalty, swelling the number of inmates on death row. These developments are unconstitutional and exploit two shortcomings: First, the Constitution's provision on penalties that violate human dignity - or the interpretation of the provision - is tenuous. Second, Nigerian courts have surrendered their autonomy to statutory prescripts that remove discretion from sentencing. The Kalu case is one of many decisions that expound a flawed death penalty jurisprudence in Nigeria. A review of the jurisprudence indeed is overdue. While the death penalty may be constitutional under Nigerian law, the basis of imposing the sentence in most cases is constitutionally flawed.

Keywords : death penalty; penal proportionality; right to human dignity; right to life.

        · text in English     · English ( pdf )