UNIT 5

CHARGES IN CRIMINAL LITIGATION

A charge is a formal accusation made against a person alleging that they have committed a criminal offense. The charge is a crucial aspect of criminal litigation as it informs the accused of the specific offense they are alleged to have committed. This process is essential in ensuring that the accused person is aware of the accusations against them and is provided an opportunity to prepare a defense. In Nigeria, the legal framework governing charges is outlined in various statutes, including the criminal procedure act (CPA), criminal procedure code (CPC), and the administration of criminal justice act (ACJA) 2015.

NATURE OF A CHARGE

A charge must clearly state the offense the accused person is alleged to have committed. It should contain specific information, including the name of the accused, the specific law allegedly breached, and the particulars of the offense. The purpose is to ensure that the accused understands the nature of the offense and can respond appropriately. A charge must not be vague or ambiguous; otherwise, it may be struck out by the court. See section 36(6) of the constitution of Nigeria which guarantees the right of an accused person to be informed promptly in a language that they understand and in detail of the nature of the offense. This constitutional provision is fundamental in ensuring fairness in criminal trials.

DRAFTING OF CHARGES

The drafting of charges is a critical step in criminal proceedings. The charge must be drafted with precision and clarity to avoid any ambiguity. The charge should set out the offense in ordinary language, while also citing the relevant statutory provisions. See section 195 of the criminal procedure act which provides that every charge or information shall be read and explained to the accused person in the language that they understand. This ensures that the accused comprehends the charges against them and the case of FRN V. Dairo (2015) LPELR-24381(SC) where the supreme court emphasized the importance of properly drafted charges. The court held that where a charge is vague or lacks sufficient detail, it could be quashed on the basis that it fails to provide the accused with adequate information to prepare a defense.

AMENDMENT OF CHARGES

Charges may be amended at any stage of the trial before judgment is delivered. The amendment can be initiated by the prosecution if it is deemed necessary to correct any defects or to align the charges with the evidence presented. The amendment must not prejudice the accused, and the accused must be given adequate opportunity to respond to the amended charges. See section 216 of the administration of criminal justice act 2015 which allows the prosecution to amend a charge at any stage of the proceedings before judgment. The court is empowered to permit such amendments, provided they do not result in a miscarriage of justice. The accused must be given the opportunity to object or request an adjournment to prepare a defense against the amended charge and the case of Abacha V. State (2002) 11 NWLR (pt. 779) 437 where the court held that an amendment of a charge is permissible provided that it does not introduce a new or distinct offense from the one initially charged and does not prejudice the defense of the accused.

DEFECTIVE CHARGES

A charge is considered defective if it fails to disclose an offense known to law, is vague, or does not comply with the statutory requirements for drafting charges. A defective charge may lead to the dismissal of the case if it cannot be rectified. See section 220 of the criminal procedure act which provides that no error in stating the offense or its particulars, or in the description of the accused, will be regarded as material unless the accused was misled by such error or omission and the case of Akinbiyi V. State (1999) 6 NWLR (pt. 607) 510 where the court held that a charge that is vague or lacks sufficient particulars is defective and may lead to an acquittal if it causes a miscarriage of justice.

JOINDER OF CHARGES

Multiple charges can be joined in a single trial if they arise out of the same transaction or series of transactions. The joinder of charges is aimed at promoting judicial efficiency and avoiding the duplication of trials. See section 156 of the criminal procedure act which permits the joinder of charges where they are based on the same facts or are part of a series of offenses of the same or similar character and the case of Okafor V. State (2016) LPELR-40449(SC) where the supreme court in this case reiterated the principles guiding the joinder of charges, emphasizing that the charges must be sufficiently connected in terms of facts and legal character to warrant a single trial.

SEPARATION OF CHARGES

In certain circumstances, charges may be separated to ensure a fair trial. This usually occurs when the offenses are not related, or where the inclusion of multiple charges may prejudice the accused. See section 157 of the criminal procedure act which allows the court to order the separation of charges if it is of the opinion that the accused may be prejudiced by the joinder of multiple charges in a single trial and the case of Emeka V. State (2001) 14 NWLR (pt. 734) 666 where the court emphasized that the separation of charges is necessary where the offenses are distinct and unconnected, to prevent the accused from being prejudiced in their defense.

CONCLUSION

The process of charging an accused person is a fundamental aspect of criminal litigation. It is essential that charges are properly drafted, clear, and precise to ensure that the accused is fully aware of the offense they are alleged to have committed. The Nigerian legal framework provides robust guidelines on the drafting, amendment, and handling of charges to safeguard the rights of the accused and to promote the administration of justice.