The Federal High Court in Enugu has ruled in a landmark public interest case that mandatory death sentences rob courts of their sentencing discretion.

Justice MT Segun-Bello delivered the judgment in a case challenging the mandatory death sentence provisions in Nigerian laws and their impact on the sentencing discretion of Nigerian courts.

The case, numbered FHC/EN/CS/212/2024, was filed by Joy Nnani and Angela Uwandu-Iwuchukwu, the Country Director of Avocats Sans Frontières France (Lawyers Without Borders).

In her ruling, Justice Segun-Bello granted the applicants’ first relief, declaring that statutory provisions imposing a mandatory death sentence, without allowing judicial discretion in sentencing, deprive judges of sentencing discretion.

The court acknowledged global trends toward mitigating the death penalty, citing comparisons with jurisdictions such as South Africa, Lesotho, the United States, India, China, and Europe.

It noted that in Nigeria, judicial discretion is still restricted by statute and the doctrine of stare decisis.
However, the court declined to grant the applicants’ second and third reliefs, which sought orders compelling the Executive and Legislative arms of government to amend the affected laws. The court held that such directives fall within the responsibilities of those arms of government and cannot be imposed by judicial order.

Counsel for the applicants described the judgment as a significant development in the ongoing constitutional debate on criminal justice reform, judicial discretion and sentencing practices in Nigeria.

The decision is expected to contribute to wider discussions on mandatory sentencing provisions within Nigeria’s constitutional democracy and rule of law framework.

They urged the Executive and Legislative arms of government to take steps to ensure courts are allowed to exercise discretion in sentencing, including the commutation of death sentences.

The court held that until such reforms are addressed, the hands of Nigerian courts will remain constrained.