BY LYDIA EHISUORIA OHONSI
The Lagos State Administration of Criminal Justice Law (ACJL) 2015 addresses the issue of pre-trial parade of suspects primarily through a recent amendment which explicitly abolishes the public parade of suspects before the media by security agencies. This is embodied in Section 9(a) of the amended Lagos State ACJL, which states:
“As from the commencement of this law, the police shall refrain from parading any suspect before the media.”
This reform aims to uphold the constitutional rights of suspects, including the presumption of innocence until proven guilty as guaranteed under Sections 34 and 36(4) and (5) of the 1999 Constitution of Nigeria. The amendment is intended to prevent the violation of suspects’ rights to dignity, fair hearing, and protection from inhuman or degrading treatment. Before this reform, pre-trial media parades were common, often prejudging suspects and violating their fundamental rights under both the Constitution and the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights.
REFORMS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ON PRE-TRIAL PARADE IN ACJL 2015:
The Lagos State House of Assembly added the provision banning public media parades of suspects in the ACJL amendment to curb the practice.
This provision requires police and security agencies to stop parading suspects before the media at any stage before trial.
Legal experts and human rights advocates recommend strict enforcement of this provision, including sanctions for violations, to protect suspects from psychological and mental torture, and uphold fair trial rights.
Calls for further public and judicial awareness are made to ensure this reform is respected on all law enforcement levels.
This reform aligns with constitutional guarantees and international human rights standards and represents a significant step in protecting suspects’ rights in Lagos State during pre-trial
The Lagos State Administration of Criminal Justice Law (ACJL) 2015 addresses the abolition of stay of proceedings mainly in:
1. SECTIONS RELEVANT TO STAY OF PROCEEDINGS:
Section 273 ACJL 2015: Explicitly abolishes the stay of proceedings in criminal trials.
Similarly, provisions consistent with Section 306 of the Federal Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA) 2015, which states that applications for stay of proceedings in criminal matters shall not be entertained, have been domesticated in Lagos ACJL.
Context and reforms:
The abolition aims to eliminate the frequent and abusive use of interlocutory applications such as stay of proceedings to suspend trials and cause delays.
This reform is intended to promote speedy trials and prevent accused persons from exploiting procedural delays to frustrate justice.
However, it has been noted that while genuine preliminary objections are important and may terminate frivolous charges, the outright ban on stay applications may sometimes conflict with defendants’ constitutional rights.
Recommendations for reform include a review of Section 374 ACJL to allow trial courts to determine preliminary objections without necessarily staying proceedings and providing for interlocutory rulings that do not halt the trial process unless the objection succeeds and terminates the case.
Judicial discretion to stay proceedings suo motu (without application) in exceptional cases for the interest of justice is also seen as necessary to protect the judiciary’s integrity.
In summary, Section 273 ACJL abolishes stay of proceedings to prevent delays, but reforms suggest nuanced provisions allowing interlocutory rulings without automatic stays, balancing speedy trial with defendants’ rights.
The Lagos State Administration of Criminal Justice Law (ACJL) 2015 addresses trial in absentia primarily in:
2. SECTIONS ON TRIAL IN ABSENTIA
Section 235 ACJL 2015 (as amended): Allows trial and conviction of a defendant in absentia when the defendant (a) has been granted bail but fails to attend court without reasonable explanation, (b) remains absent after two court adjournments, and (c) has been duly served or summonsed. The court may proceed with trial and enter a plea of not guilty on behalf of the defendant if absent without reasonable excuse.
The court must defer sentencing until the defendant is re-arrested or surrenders, ensuring the sentencing only occurs when the accused is present physically again.
Recommendations for Substituted Service
The ACJL recognizes service of criminal charges on the defendant’s lawyer as valid.
Experts recommend adding provisions for substituted service such as pasting court/process documents on the defendant’s last known address when personal service is impracticable or the defendant is evading service.
This would strengthen the ability to bring suspects who abscond to trial fairly without violating their constitutional rights under fair hearing.
Amending Section 235 to explicitly provide for substituted service mechanisms is suggested to close gaps in securing the accused’s presence or knowledge of proceedings.
In summary, Section 235 ACJL 2015 permits trial in absentia with safeguards such as mandatory bail grant previously, reasonable excuses for absence, and deferred sentencing. Recommendations to enhance the law include formalizing substituted service by posting process to the defendant’s last known address when personal service fails
The Lagos State Administration of Criminal Justice Law (ACJL) 2015 does not explicitly provide for the use of lay police prosecutors as authorized prosecutors in court.
3. KEY PROVISIONS AND INTERPRETATIONS ON POLICE PROSECUTORS:
The general principle derived from similar provisions in the Federal Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA) 2015 and reflected in the Lagos ACJL is that only qualified legal practitioners (lawyers) are authorized to prosecute criminal cases in court.
Section 106 of the Federal ACJA 2015 is influential here and is commonly applied by analogy in Lagos: it restricts the right of prosecution to qualified legal practitioners such as the Attorney-General, Law Officers, or lawyers authorized by law. Lay police officers who are not legal practitioners are generally prohibited from prosecuting cases.
Lay police officers (non-lawyer police personnel) may have the role of investigation and filing First Information Reports (FIRs), but they cannot conduct prosecutions in court unless they are qualified legal practitioners.
This interpretation reflects a shift towards professionalizing the prosecutorial function for better efficiency, competence, and protection of defendants’ rights.
Where police officers prosecute, they must be legally qualified; otherwise, a lawyer must be assigned to conduct prosecutions.
Recommendations:
The Lagos ACJL system should enforce existing provisions strictly to ensure that all prosecutions in court are handled by trained lawyers rather than lay police prosecutors to enhance the quality and fairness of trials.
Training and capacity-building for police officers should emphasize investigative roles, with prosecutorial functions reserved for qualified lawyers.
The Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) and the Lagos AttorneyGeneral’s office should supervise prosecution assignments to prevent lay police officers from conducting court prosecutions.
In summary, the ACJL aligns with the principle that prosecution of offences must be undertaken by trained legal practitioners, not lay police prosecutors, ensuring a more professional and rights-compliant criminal justice process.
The Lagos State Administration of Criminal Justice Law (ACJL) 2015 provides clear provisions for magistrates’ oversight functions over police stations and detention facilities to ensure lawful detention and protection of suspects’ rights.
Relevant Sections:
Section 33 ACJL 2015: Requires the officer in charge of a police station or authorized agency to submit monthly reports to the nearest magistrate detailing all suspects arrested without warrant, including whether bail was granted or refused. The magistrate forwards these reports to the Criminal Justice Monitoring Committee for analysis and recommendation.
