This study, “CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF CORROBORATION UNDER THE NIGERIAN LAW OF EVIDENCE” contains concise information that will serve as a framework or guide for your project work. The project study is well-researched for academic purposes and are usually provided in complete chapters with adequate References. Keywords: CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF CORROBORATION UNDER THE NIGERIAN LAW OF EVIDENCE
ABSTRACT There is no law that says the plaintiff or the prosecution must bring a million witnesses or evidence to court before he can succeed in his case. A court can convict on a single witness. A case is not decided by the numbers of witnesses, single credible convincing evidence is enough to convict in a case but there are some exceptions”. The exceptions refer to by this learned mean the circumstances where corroboration will be required before any judge can decide his case. Although a judge can convict upon the uncorroborated evidence of an accomplice but he must warn himself before given such conviction in fact he is advised to seek corroborating evidence before convicting an accused because failure to do so can lead to the setting aside of his judgment on appeal. Generally, corroboration cuts a niche for itself, it is used both in criminal and civil cases. It will also state the position of judges on the issue of corroboration and various decisions of court on different issues arising from corroboration. In law, corroboration, though popular yet controversial virtually under all legal system this is due to the influence and interpretation of the provisions of the Evidence Act and the criminal and penal codes (on corroboration of evidence) by judges. The desirability of corroboration as a requirement in certain criminal and civil cases under the Nigerian law of evidence and the hope of examine it critically under our legal system is the core focus of this study. This work will therefore elucidate the meaning of corroboration in Nigeria and Canada generally, the role of judges in deciding both civil and criminal cases and various statutory provisions in respect of corroboration of evidence in Nigeria relying largely on both primary and secondary source of law of evidence in Nigeria. TABLE OF CASES NIGERIA • Anthony Enahoro v R (1965) NWLR 265 @ 280 • Alli v Alli [1965]3 All ER 48 • Brighty v Pearson (1938)4 All ER 127 • Bakobah v Yauri N.A Police (1970) 107 NNLR • Davis v DPP [1954] AC 378 • Emmanuel Ugwumba v State [1993] 5 NWLR 660 • Hamid Musa & or v Yahaya Kefas Yerima & Anor [1997]7 NWLR 27.SC • Johnson Erelau v I.R (1959)WRNLR 77 (Fsc) • Mauka Ogbodu v State [1936]5 NWLR C.A • R v Makanjuola [1995]3 All ER 73 @ 731j-733g • R v Spencer (HL) (1987) AC 128, (1973)2 WLR 24 • R v Salami Ogunubi (1932)11 NLR • R v Francis Kufi (1969) WNLR • Stephen Emoga v State (1997)9 NWLR 25 SC UNITED KINGDOM • Hill v Willson (1873)8 ch App 880 • R v Christie [1914] A.C 545 • R v Longstaff (1977) Crim L R 216 • R v Sauder (1961)46 Cr APP R 60 • Nicola v Penny (1950)2 KB 466 • R v Mildwinter (1971)55 Cr App R 523 • R v Marks (1963) Crim L R 370 • R v Chance [1988] QB 732 • Thomas v Jones (QBD) (1920)2KB 399 • R v Hills (1987)86 Cr App R 26 • R v Redpath (1962)46 Cr App R 319,321 • R v Chauhan (1918)7 E Cr App R 232 • R v Whitehead [1929]1 K.B 99 @ 102 • R v O”connor [1980] Crim L.R 43 C.A • R v Turnbull [1977] QB 224 [1976]3 All ER 549 C.A TABLE OF STATUES ENGLAND • Sexual Offence Act 1956 • Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 • Road Traffic Act 1984 • Perjury Act 1911 • Divorce Reform Act 1969 • Civil Evidence Act 1963 • Criminal Justice Act 1988 NIGERIA The Evidence Act 1945, Cap 112 LFN LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS • WNLR: Western Nigeria Law Report • WRNLR: Western Regional Nigeria Law Report • NWLR: Nigeria Weekly Law Report • NLR: Nigeria Law Report • NNLR: Northern Nigeria Law Report • A.C : Appeal Cases • WLR: Western Law Report • ALL ER : All England Report • Q.B: Queen’s Bench • K.B : King’s Bench TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER 1 GENERAL INTRODUCTION 1.0.0: INTRODUCTION 1.1.0: BACKGROUND TO THE STUDY 1.2.0: OBJECTIVES OF STUDY 1.3.0: FOCUS OF STUDY 1.4.0 SCOPE OF STUDY 1.5.0: METHODOLOGY 1.6.0: LITERATURE REVIEW 1.7.0: CONCLUSION CHAPTER 2 PRINCIPLE OF CORROBORATION 2.0.0: INTRODUCTION 2.1.0: HISTORICAL BACKGROUND OF CORROBORATION IN NIGERIA 2.2.0: MEANING / DEFINITION 2.3.0: NATURE OF CORROBORATION 2.4.0 EVIDENCE REQURING CORROBORTION 2.5.0: CONCLUSION CHAPTER 3 RULES OF CORROBORATION 3.0.0: INTRODUCTION 3.1.0: FORMS OF CORROBORATION 3.1.1.0: AS A MATTER OF LAW 3.1.1.1: AS A MATTER OF PRACTISE 3.2.0: TYPES OF CORROBORATION 3.2.1.0: MUTUAL CORROBORATION 3.2.1.1: CUMMULATIVE CORROBORATION 3.2.1.2: IDENTIFICATION CASES AND CORROBORATION 3.3.0: CORROBORATION UNDER THE COMMON LAW 3.4.0: CONCLUSION CHAPTER 4 INCIDENCES OF CORROBORATION. 4.0.0: INTRODUCTION 4.1.0: CORROBORATION IN CIVIL CASES 4.2.0: CORROBORATION IN CRIMINAL CASES 4.3.0: ROLES OF JUDGES AND JURY IN CORROBORATION 4.4.0: PROBLEMS OF CORROBORATION 4.5.0: SOLUTIONS TO THE PROBLEMS 4.6.0: CONCLUSION CHAPTER 5 GENERAL CONCLUSION 5.0.0: CONCLUSION 5.1.0: RECOMMENDATION BIBILOGRAPHY CHAPTER 1 GENERAL INTRODUCTION 1.0.0: INTRODUCTION Corroboration is evidence tending to confirm some fact of which other evidence is given. As a matter of common sense, the more corroboration is present the easier it is to prove a fact and from this point of view a judge will always look for corroborating evidence. Corroboration according to Osborn’s Concise Dictionary1 means independent evidence which implicate a person accused of a crime by connecting him with it, or an evidence which confirms in some fact particularly not only that the crime has been committed but also that the accused actually committed the crime. According to Oxford Dictionary2 corroboration mean evidence given to further support or strength existing evidence. Corroboration according to the Evidence Ac3t refers to an independent statement made by other witness which proves the truth of the first evidence. It is also refer to as the requirement in some jurisdiction such as Scotland that any evidence adduced be backed up by at least one other source. 1 8th edition by leslie Rutherford 2 2nd edition vol.11 1963 by Horny Oxford University Sheila bone 3 Evidence act 1945 cap 112 L.F.N 1990 Corroboration is a mandatory requirement under certain circumstances, in the sense that no matter how convincing the evidence requiring corroboration is, the party relying on that evidence will fail unless he adduces corroboration. Corroboration is therefore called for where there is need order to ascertain that such evidence can be relied upon to convict the accused person. Corroboration is a ground for the admissibility of certain evidence for the purpose of conviction
Keywords: CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF CORROBORATION UNDER THE NIGERIAN LAW OF EVIDENCE
|
