Dr Nasiru Tijani and Ugochukwu Charles Kanu ,
Rethinking Defence of Alibi: A Lesser Evidential Burden on Defendant? Abubakar Sale v State (2016) 3 NWLR (Pt. 1499) 392 Examined.,
5 (4) IJLMH Page 15 - 29 (2022), DOI: https://doij.org/10.10000/IJLMH.113104
A defendant that raises a defence of Alibi has the evidential burden to prove where he was at the time of the crime which is the subject matter of the charge or information. It is critical that the defendant at the earliest opportunity gives particulars of the Alibi to the police so that they can investigate. To what extent is the suspect/defendant required to supply particulars? What constitutes particulars? Are there circumstances when the requirement for particulars will be said to be complied with even though the suspect in his extra judicial statement did not apparently make a ‘full disclosure’? The nature and extent of particulars to be given by the suspect/defendant is examined in view of several decisions of courts and the recent decision of the Supreme Court on the evidential burden on the defendant who raises a defence of Alibi. A comparative study of other jurisdictions is undertaken to see if there are advancement in this area of criminal litigation. This is the subject of the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Abubakar Sale v State (2016) 3 NWLR (Pt. 1499) 392 under review.
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution -NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0) (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which permits remixing, adapting, and building upon the work for non-commercial use, provided the original work is properly cited.