n Compulaw - 1st Indigenous Digital Law Library
Disable Preloader

CaseLaw

Ezekiel V. AGF (2017) CLR 3(d) (SC)

Judgement delivered on March, 10th 2017

Brief

  • Criminal offence.
  • Powers of the Attorney General to Institute an action.
  • Section 150 of the 1999 Constitution
  • Section 174 of the 1999 Constitution
  • Section 174(3) of the 1999 Constitution
  • Section 174(1)(b) of the 1999 Constitution
  • Section 174(2) of the 1999 Constitution
  • Section 4(c) of the National Agency for the Prohibition of Trafficking in Persons (NAPTIP)
  • Section 60 of the National Agency for the Prohibition of Trafficking in Persons (NAPTIP)
  • Section 64 of the National Agency for the Prohibition of Trafficking in Persons (NAPTIP)
  • Section 4 of the Trafficking in Persons (Prohibition) Law Enforcement and Administration Act, 2003
  • Section 9(2) of the Trafficking in Persons (Prohibition) Law Enforcement and Administration Act, 2003
  • Section 60 of Trafficking in Persons (Prohibition) Law Enforcement and Administration Act 2003
  • Section 15(a) of the Trafficking in Persons (Prohibition) Law Enforcement and Administration Act, 2003
  • Section 15(c) of the Trafficking in Persons (Prohibition) Law Enforcement and Administration Act, 2003
  • Section 16 of the Trafficking in Persons (Prohibition) Law Enforcement and Administration Act, 2003
  • Section 19(1)(b) of the Trafficking in Persons (Prohibition) Law Enforcement and Administration Act, 2003
  • Section 19 (1) (d) of the Trafficking in Persons (Prohibition) Law Enforcement and Administration Act, 2003
  • Section 21 of the Trafficking in Persons (Prohibition) Law Enforcement and Administration Act, 2003

Facts

On the 18th of November,2011 the appellant herein and others were arraigned before the Federal High Court, Ikeja Judicial Division on a Charge of trafficking in persons contrary to Sections 15 (a); 15 (c ); 16; 19 (1) (b); 19 (1) (d) and 21 of the Trafficking in Persons (Prohibition) Law Enforcement and Administration Act, 2003 (as amended).

The charge was signed and dated by a Law Officer of NAPTIP for the Honourable Attorney General of the Federation.

On the 18th of November, 2012 the charge was amended and signed by the Law Officer against the appellant only alleged to have committed the offences.Upon her arraignment on the amended charge on the appellant, who was unrepresented, pleaded guilty to all the counts.

However, the trial court found the appellant guilty as charged and convicted same on all eighteen counts thereby sentencing her to various degrees of sentences; all sentences to run concurrently.

Aggrieved, the appellant appealed her conviction and sentence to the Court of Appeal which dismissed same. Hence, a further appeal to the Apex Court.

Issues

  • 1
    Whether Law Officers of the National Agency for the Prohibition of Traffic...

Read More