LEGAL PRINCIPLE: EVIDENCE LAW — Confessional Evidence — Confessional Statement Not Read Over to Superior Police Officer — Effect
PRINCIPLE STATEMENT
It is not the law that a true and voluntary confessional statement not read over or confirmed before a superior police officer ceases ipso facto to be true or voluntary or that it is thereby rendered weightless or inadmissible.
RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)
Per Iguh, JSC, in Ikpo v. The State (1995) NLC-1321994(SC) at p. 13; Paras. A–C.
"It is not the law that a true and voluntary confessional statement not read over or confirmed before a superior police officer ceases ipso facto to be true or voluntary confessional statement or that it is thereby rendered weightless or inadmissible."
EXPLANATION / SCOPE
Confirmation before a superior police officer is not a prerequisite for admissibility. A confession remains admissible and retains its weight even without such confirmation. The requirement is a rule of practice, not a condition precedent. The principle ensures that confessions are not excluded on technical grounds. The court must still be satisfied that the confession was voluntary and true. The rule applies to both judicial and extrajudicial confessions. The absence of confirmation may affect weight but not admissibility. The principle promotes substance over form.