By:
Sadiq Dasin
What trended in Nigeria today was the news that the FCT Federal High Court has discharged and acquitted the former SGF Babachir Lawal of all the charges of diversion of funds, criminal conspiracy and official corruption to the tune of N544 million proffered against him by the EFCC. This judgement has a strong legal implication that needs to be understood. The implication is in the difference between ‘discharge’ and ‘acquitted’.
The difference between the two is that if an accused person is only discharged by a court of law, it simply means he was asked to go home because the prosecution has failed to present a prima facie (first impression) evidence against him to warrant his prosecution.
However, by merely discharging an accused, it means he can be re-arrested and be charged to court when new evidence emerges or when the prosecution strongly feels they can substantiate their claims better. So, an accused person that is merely discharged may still have a case to answer.
On the other hand, if a court says an accused is discharged and acquitted as in Mr. Babachir’s case, it means that the court has found the accused person innocent of all the charges proffered against him after carefully looking at the facts and evidence presented by the prosecution.
Babachir Lawal has been accused of a crime. After several months of trial, the court found no evidence against him to warrant his imprisonment. In other words what the court said is that the prosecution is unable to prove its case beyond all reasonable doubts.
The law is a little bit complicated here. But it is made simple by the doctrine of AUTRE FOIS ACQUIT. By this doctrine, the law says once an accused is discharged and acquitted, as in the case Babachir, the doctrine comes alive. This doctrine is contained in Section 36 (9) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended) which says as follows-
“36 (9) No person who shows that he has been tried by any court of competent jurisdiction or tribunal for a criminal offence and either convicted or acquitted shall again be tried for that offence or for a criminal offence having the same ingredients as that offence save upon the order of a superior court”.
So Babachir is now free of all criminal charges with which he was charged at the FCT Federal High Court and he shall not again be tried for that offence or for a criminal offence having the same ingredients as that offence. However, he may be charged for the said offences “upon the order of a superior court.”
If you find it difficult to understand this, just remember that the difference between ‘discharge’ and ‘acquitted’ lies in their legal implication. The legal effect DISCHARGE is that the charge of the prosecution was not substantiated while an order of ACQUITTAL is given because the accused was found not guilty.
Barr. Sadiq Ibrahim Dasin
Former Lawmaker in the
National Assembly for the
People of Fofure/Song