LEGAL PRINCIPLE: CRIMINAL LAW – Rape – Corroboration – Requirement in Practice to Warn of Danger of Convicting on Uncorroborated Evidence
PRINCIPLE STATEMENT
It is an established practice in criminal law that though corroboration of the evidence of the prosecutrix in a rape case is not essential in law, it is, in practice always looked for and it is also the practice to warn the jury against the danger of acting upon her uncorroborated testimony.
RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)
Per Kalgo, JSC, in Iko v. State (2001) NLC-1772001(SC) at p. 12; Paras A–C.
"It is an established practice in criminal law that though corroboration of the evidence of the prosecutrix in a rape case is not essential in law, it is, in practice always looked for and it is also the practice to warn the jury against the danger of acting upon her uncorroborated testimony."
EXPLANATION / SCOPE
In rape cases, corroboration is not essential in law but is always looked for in practice. The judge must warn the jury (or themselves) of the danger of convicting on the uncorroborated testimony of the complainant. The warning is mandatory in practice. The judge must give reasons for accepting the uncorroborated evidence if convicting. The rule protects against wrongful convictions based on false allegations. The practice applies even where the judge sits alone. The warning must be explicit. Failure to give the warning may lead to conviction being set aside. The principle balances the need to punish sexual offences with the risk of false accusations. The judge must demonstrate awareness of the danger.
