25/07/2024
*ANY CONFESSIONAL STATEMENT OBTAINED WITHOUT VIDEO RECORDING OR IN THE PRESENCE OF A LAWYER IS INADMISSIBLE*
_*F.R.N. v. Nnajiofor (2024) 10 NWLR (Part 1947) 443*_ delivered on *1/3/ 2024*
In 2019, the Court of Appeal in *Nnajiofor v. F.R.N (2019) 2 NWLR (Part 1655) 157* was faced with a particular question. In that case, the question arose as to whether the use of the word "may" when taking statements in S. 15(4) and S. 17(2) of the *A.C.J.A 2015* is mandatory or permissive.
Ekanem J.C.A who delivered the lead Judgment and applied the mischief rule of interpretation held thus:
_"to hold that the word "may" in the said provisions carry a discretionary or permissive meaning would not suppress the mischief the provisions are aimed at curing nor would it advance the remedy for it...*The provisions are for the benefit of private citizens who are suspected of committing crimes so that enormous powers of the police or other law enforcement agencies may not be abused by intimidating them or bullying them in the course of taking their statements*...I should also add that the provisions also have another side to it, viz; to protect law enforcement agents from false accusation of coercion in taking statements from suspects"_
Few years later, the Supreme Court per Ogunwumiju, JSC in her concurring judgment in the case of
_*Charles v. The State of Lagos (2023) 13 NWLR (Part 1901) 213 (SC)*_ gave judicial blessing to the Court of Appeal decision cited Supra. However, most people opined that the prouncement of Hon. Justice Ogunwumiju in Charles v. State of Lagos (Supra) is an obiter.
It is apposite to now note that, the Court of Appeal decision in *Nnajiofor v. F.R.N. (2019)* which was decided against F.R.N (EFCC precisely) was appealed by EFCC to the Supreme Court to wit *F.R.N. v. Nnajiofor (2024) (Supra)* and the Supreme Court in a Unanimous decision affirmed the decision of the Court of Appeal as regards the Interpretation of "May" to be mandatory when it is for the benefit of a private individual.
The Apex Court inter alia opined that failure to comply with the procedure laid down by a statute, the non-compliance will be against the recalcitrant party.
Joseph Maduabuchi Ilo Esq
