RIGHT TO SILENCE: THE PERCEPTION OF NIGERIA COURTS

Abstract

The right to silence refers to the common law principle where a suspect or defendant explores his right to say nothing to interrogations put to him either during pre-trial by the police or during the trial in the court. By extension, juries and magistrates, prosecutors and judges are not encouraged to conclude that a defendant is guilty merely because he has refused to respond to allegations, particularly from the police or has refused to testify in court in his own defence1 . Extraction of confessional statements by security agents through oppressive means from suspects is a fact in Nigeria. Though the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 ensures the protection of anyone suspected to have committed a crime through the right to silence, yet this constitutional right is being continuously denied the suspects. It is trite that any uncontrolled power would ultimately lead to abuse. Hence, the purpose of the right to silence is to protect the citizen from torture and coerced confessions from public authorities.2 This paper critically examined the statutory provisions of the right to silence in Nigeria as well as some other jurisdictions, namely, England and the US. The paper critically examined the attitude of the courts in Nigeria as it relates to the enforcement of the right to silence. This work found out that Nigeria courts view the admissibility of confessions from the perspective of the Evidence Act and not the stronger constitutional principle of the right to silence as enshrined in the Constitution. The paper recommended that to promote fair trial, due recourse should be given to the enforcement of the right to silence by Nigeria courts as enshrined in the Constitution. The paper adopted the doctrinal approach in its research. This was due to reliance on legislation, Statutes, case law, journals, textbooks and relevant internet resources to arrive at the position of the law on the subject matter.