LEGAL PRINCIPLE: CRIMINAL LAW – Defences – Provocation – When Unavailable to Reduce Murder to Manslaughter
PRINCIPLE STATEMENT
The defences of provocation, mistake or accident were fully considered by the trial court and the Court of Appeal and were found to be not available to the appellant. I agree with this conclusion.
RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)
Per Wali, JSC, in Ubani v. State (2001) NLC-2072000(SC) at p. 1; Paras D–E.
"The defences of provocation, mistake or accident were fully considered by the trial court and the Court of Appeal and were found to be not available to the appellant. I agree with this conclusion."
EXPLANATION / SCOPE
Provocation is unavailable to reduce murder to manslaughter if the trial and appellate courts find the defence not established. The defence requires sudden loss of self-control caused by the victim’s act, before cooling time. The burden is on the accused to prove provocation on a balance of probabilities. If the evidence does not support the defence, it fails. The appellate court will not interfere with concurrent findings on provocation unless manifestly erroneous. The principle respects the lower courts’ evaluation of evidence. The accused must show that the provocation was sufficient to cause a reasonable person to lose self-control. Mere anger or resentment is insufficient.
