A Lagos State Sexual Offences and Domestic Violence Court sitting at Ikeja has struck out a defilement charge against one Oke Joshua following the prosecution’s failure to produce witnesses to prosecute the case.
Justice Rahman Oshodi struck out the case on Tuesday after upholding an application by the defence seeking its dismissal for want of diligent prosecution.
The defendant had been in custody since 2022 over an allegation of defilement contrary to Section 137 of the Criminal Law of Lagos State, 2015.
He was arraigned before the court in November 2023.
In his ruling, Justice Oshodi noted that despite the matter coming up several times since the defendant’s arraignment, the prosecution had failed to call any witness to support its case.
“The defendant was taken into custody in 2022 on a charge of defilement,” the judge stated. “Since that date, the matter has appeared on the court’s list numerous times. Despite those listings, the prosecution has consistently failed to produce any witness to advance its case.”
The court observed that a witness summons had been issued to Inspector Lydia Otu, one of the prosecution’s witnesses, pursuant to Section 177(1) of the Administration of Criminal Justice Law of Lagos State, but she failed to attend court.
“Inspector Lydia Otu has failed to attend this court notwithstanding a witness summons duly issued pursuant to section 177(1) of the ACJL. No justification has been offered for that failure,” Justice Oshodi held.
The judge described the case as another example of the persistent difficulty in securing the attendance of witnesses in criminal trials in Lagos State.
Referring to his earlier judgement in The State of Lagos v. Dauda Salami, delivered on the same day, Justice Oshodi reiterated that witness attendance remains critical to the administration of criminal justice.
“The availability of witnesses is central to the fair and proper resolution of any criminal trial,” he said. “Yet in the criminal courts of Lagos State, witnesses who made statements to the police during investigations frequently cannot be found or compelled to testify.”
According to the judge, existing legal mechanisms designed to compel witness attendance have proved ineffective in practice.
“The instruments designed under sections 177 and 179 of the ACJL to secure the attendance of witnesses have proved largely ineffective,” he noted.
Justice Oshodi also drew attention to the Lagos State Victim Assistance and Witness Protection Law, observing that the agency established under the law to support victims and witnesses has yet to be constituted.
“The protections and mechanisms envisaged by the Law remain, for practical purposes, unavailable,” he said.
Ruling on the defence application, the judge held that Section 232(1)(b) of the Lagos State Administration of Criminal Justice (Amendment) Law 2021 empowers the court to strike out proceedings where witnesses fail to attend, and the prosecution cannot reasonably explain their absence.
“As the learned defence counsel rightly submitted, Section 232(1)(b) expressly authorises the court to strike out proceedings where witnesses do not attend on the trial date, and the prosecution cannot reasonably account for their absence.
“The prosecution has offered no such account. In these circumstances, I am compelled to exercise the power conferred by Section 232(1)(b) ,” he held.
Justice Oshodi consequently struck out the charge and discharged the defendant.
“This case is accordingly struck out. The defendant is discharged. It must, however, be clearly understood that this discharge does not amount to an acquittal,” the judge ruled.
