LEGAL PRINCIPLE: CRIMINAL PROCEDURE — Trial Within Trial — Procedure — Whether Accused Can Testify in Trial Within Trial
PRINCIPLE STATEMENT
An accused person who alleges that a confessional statement attributed to him was not voluntary is a competent witness in the trial within a trial; his evidence may contain facts and circumstances relied on to show the statement was involuntary.
RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)
Per Uwaifo, JSC, in Emeka v. State (2001) NLC-72000(SC) at p. 14; Paras A–B.
"An accused person who alleges that the confessional statement attributed to him was not voluntary is a competent witness in the trial within a trial. If he elects to testify, his evidence is likely to contain facts and circumstances which he relies on as to the statement being involuntary."
EXPLANATION / SCOPE
The accused is a competent witness in a trial within a trial to challenge the voluntariness of a confession. The accused may testify about the circumstances surrounding the making of the statement, such as threats, inducements, or oppression. The accused’s testimony is part of the evidence the judge considers in determining voluntariness. The accused may also call other witnesses. The prosecution bears the burden of proving voluntariness beyond reasonable doubt. The accused’s testimony may create reasonable doubt. The principle ensures that the accused has a full opportunity to challenge the confession. The accused is not compelled to testify; the choice is voluntary. The rule applies to both the trial within a trial and the main trial.