LEGAL PRINCIPLE: EVIDENCE LAW — Medical Evidence — Post-Mortem Examination — Medical Officer as Pathologist
PRINCIPLE STATEMENT
A Medical Officer in the service of a state undertaking a post-mortem examination is a pathologist, and his report is the certificate envisaged by section 41(1)(a) of the Evidence Act. The certificate has the effect of being sufficient evidence of the facts therein.
RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)
Per Onu, JSC, in Amusa v. State (2003) NLC-3362001(SC) at p. 8; Paras A–C.
"Medical Officer in the service of a state for the purpose of undertaking a post mortem examination is a pathologist and his report is the certificate envisaged by S. 41(1)(a) of the Evidence Act. The certificate has the effect of being sufficient evidence of the facts therein."
EXPLANATION / SCOPE
A post-mortem report by a state medical officer is admissible as a certificate. The principle applies to criminal trials. The certificate is sufficient evidence of the facts. The rule is statutory. The defence may challenge the certificate. The principle promotes efficiency. The court may rely on the certificate.