Analysis and Identification of Suspected Substance in the Trial of Drug Offences in Nigeria: A Review of Oyem v FRN

Abstract

Purpose: The purpose of the review was to show that the affirmation of the appellant's conviction in the case of Oyem v FRN by the Nigerian apex court was erroneous. To achieve the purpose, it is expedient to unravel the various errors committed by the apex court as a result of its failure to adhere to the law and to observe the peculiarities in the procedure for the trial of drug offences.

Methodology: This work adopts the doctrinal method of research which involves the use of primary and secondary sources of law. The primary sources used in this work were legislation (Acts of the National Assembly), Case laws and Decrees while the secondary sources were books and article. The review of Oyem's case in substance reveals that the apex court affirmed the conviction of the appellant on the assumption that, (1) the result of the preliminary (color) test conducted by the exhibit keeper at the NDLEA Command, using UN Narcotic Identification Testing Kit was the legal proof of the suspected substance as Indian hemp, instead of a chemist's report on the mandatory confirmatory laboratory test by an analyst and, (2) the appellant's confessional statement and guilty plea served as alternative proof that the suspected substance was Indian hemp even when the trial court did not carry out the test of veracity on the confessional statement.

Findings: The two (2) assumptions by the apex court are the main findings in this work. Furthermore, even when the appellant was charged, tried and convicted for an offence constituted by expert evidence, no expert gave evidence at the trial, at least not on record. This work is of the view that extra-judicial confession made prior to analysis of a suspected substance cannot serve as proof of the nature of the substance, that is, Indian hemp. Moreover, the Nigerian Evidence Law having provided for the method for the analysis and identification of suspected substance in the trial of drug offences no other method can be used under the law.