LEGAL PRINCIPLE: CRIMINAL PROCEDURE — Arraignment — Satisfaction of Court — Presumption Where Plea Taken
PRINCIPLE STATEMENT
If the Judge was not satisfied that the charge was properly explained, he would not proceed to take the plea; by taking the plea, it must be presumed that he was satisfied.
RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)
Per Ogundare, JSC, in Eyisi & Ors v. State (2000) NLC-1601999(SC) at p. 28; Paras D–F.
"Surely, if the Judge was not satisfied he would not proceed to take the plea of the appellant. By his taking the plea therefore, it must be presumed that he was satisfied that the charge was properly explained to the appellant and the latter understood same. After all the maxim is: Omnia praesumuntur rite et solemniter esse acta."
EXPLANATION / SCOPE
The maxim omnia praesumuntur rite et solemniter esse acta (all things are presumed to have been done rightly and solemnly) applies to the taking of a plea. The trial judge’s decision to proceed with the plea raises a presumption that the charge was properly read and explained to the accused’s satisfaction. The accused bears the burden of rebutting this presumption. The presumption is rebuttable; the accused must point to evidence in the record showing non-compliance. The principle prevents technical challenges based on absence of express recording of satisfaction. The court will not assume that the judge acted improperly. The rule promotes judicial efficiency and finality.