The Court of Appeal, Jos Division, has upheld the conviction of LCPL, Godwin Zaka of the Nigerian Army, on two counts of abduction and assault.
LCPL Zaka, until his dismissal and imprisonment, was serving with 231 Battalion Nigerian Army.
He was charged for a criminal offence of abduction and assault of one Hajiya Amina Abdullahi, found guilty, convicted and sentenced to five and two years imprisonment respectively, on both counts, on April 22, 2019.
The sentences are to run concurrently. The judgement was confirmed by the Chief of Army Staff on May 27, 2020 and promulgated on May 29 that same year.
Not satisfied with the judgement, the convict appealed against the judgement at the Jos Division of the Court of Appeal, pleading insanity.
In his argument by his lawyer filed on January 20, 2025, the appellate told the court that the learned trial court erred in law when it failed to properly evaluate the evidence and give proper consideration to the defence of insanity which availed him from the undisputed evidence before the court.
He further argued that the learned trial court erred in law when it convicted him in disregard of reasonable doubts in the case of the prosecution, “thereby occassioning a miscarriage of justice against the appellant.”
He added that the decision of the learned trial court is against the weight of evidence.
The appellant therefore, wants the court to determine “Whether from the totality of the evidence before the trial General Court Martial (GCM), the appellant is criminally culpable for the alleged offences or any other offence as alleged by the respondent?
“Whether the respondent has proved its case beyond reasonable doubt warranting the trial GCM to give judgment against the appellant?
“Whether the appellant successfully proved the defence of insanity for him not to be convicted in this matter?”
The respondent, the Nigerian Army, represented by Barr. Peter Ozoagu, analysed the medical report of the consultant psychiatrist who conducted medical evaluation on the appellant, and argued that it did not state when “the appellant became severely depressed neither did it expressly state that the appellant was insane.”
He argued that the report was obviously based on the information given by the appellant.
The counsel contended that in the report is that there are “possibilities of borderline disorder schizoid personality or schizophrenia” which suggests that the appellant’s symptoms or behaviour are not yet conclusive or definitive, adding that “the medical evaluation is inconclusive, not credible and should be jettisoned.”
He referred to the evidence of the appellant that he was a rocket propelled grenade firer and he carries the weapon with him wherever he goes while in theatre.
He also referred to the evidence of the appellant’s colleagues who testified that they knew the appellant as a mentally focused soldier who actively carried out his duties and never shown any sign of mental illness.
The respondent finally submitted that by the evidence on record, the appellant only raised a defence of insanity to secure a cheap and malicious excuse for his action.
The respondent’s defense was filed on
25/2/2025.
The trial justices in the judgement delivered on July 22, this year, and read by Justice, Misitura Bolaji-Yusuf, said “a plea of defence of insanity by a defendant in a criminal trial is an acknowledgement or acceptance that the act was committed but that the defendant by reason of insanity or unsoundness of mind is incapable of knowing the nature of the act, or that he is doing what is either wrong or contrary to law.”
They noted that the prosecution called six witnesses and tendered five exhibits including the extra judicial statement of the accused soldier, in order to prove his case.
The court added that the accused soldier admitted that he abducted the victim, Hajia Amina Abdullahi, threatened to kill her alongside her husband and mother-in-law and dragged her out of her matrimonial home, and had unlawful carnal knowledge of her twice before he let her go.
This, the court said, the accused soldier corroborated on Exhibits and F, his confessional statements.
The court therefore, stated that the action of the appellant did not show someone who did not know what he was doing.
“If he did not know that what he was doing was wrong and unlawful, why was he avoiding the people flashing torch lights around and confessing to PW1 that he purposely came for a woman not any ammunition whereas what
he told the people in the house was that he was looking for his ammunition?
“Based on the foregoing, the appeal failed. It is hereby dismissed. The judgement of 3 Division Army General Court Marshall in charge No. 3DIV/GI/300/32 delivered on 22/4/2019 and confirmed by the Chief of Army Staff on 27th May, 2020 and promulgate on 29th May, 2020, is hereby affirmed,” the court held.
Other justices in the panel are Peter Oyinenimien Affen and Abiodun Azeem Akinuemi.
The fact of the case is that LCPL, Godwin Zaka, who was on duty on or about 8th July 2016, at Chara Road, Buratai, Borno State, went to the house of one Hajiya Amina Abdulahi where he forced her at gunpoint under the watchful eyes of her mother-in-law and husband, took her out of her matrimonial home upon a threat to kill them, to a secluded area where he had unlawful carnal knowledge of her.
He was arrested the next day and after investigations were carried out by the Military Police (MP), he was then indicted and subsequently charged and tried before a General Court Martial (GCM) on the 23rd July, 2018 on two count charges.
