Is
a convicted murderer under
sentence of death a competent
witness ?-Section
1 of Forfeiture Act 1870
declares such a person
is no longer "
attainted".
Held: To be a
competent witness. Case referred
to:-
R.
v. Webb, 11 Cox 133 (1867).
C. W.
Reece for Crown.
E. J.
Alex-Taylor (A. Alakija and
Egbuna with him) for
first
Appellant.
E. A.
Ali,erele for second and
fourth Appellants. L. Odunsi
for third Appellant.
Sir
William Geary holds watching
brief for first Appellant. The
following joint opinion was
delivered:-
KINGDON, C.J.,
NIGERIA, PETRIDES, C.J., GOLD
COAST GRAHAM PAUL, C.J., SIERRA
LEONE.
The Court is
asked the following question:-
Whether
Buraimoh Biu was, in the
circumstances set out in the
case stated 'a competent witness
at the trial, and if -he was not
what should be done in the
premises.
The material
circumstances set out are that
Buraimoh Biu was a convicted
murderer under sentence of
death.
It is clear
that at Common Law Buraimoh Biu
would not have been a competent
witness.
In 1843 the
Evidence Act (6 & 7 Viet. C. 85)
was enacted, but this still left
in some doubt the question of
whether or not a murderer under
sentence of death was a
competent witness or not. In
1867 in the case of Reg. v
Webb Lush J. held that, in
spite of the 1843 Act, such a
person was not a competent
witness, I and if there had been
no further alteration of the law
We might feel compelled to
follow that case. In 1870,
however, the Forfeiture Act (33
& 34 Viet. C. 23) was passed
which in our view places the
question beyond all doubt and
makes the present law perfectly
clear that a person under
sentence of death is a competent
witness.
The ratio
decidendi in Webb's case was
that such a person was ,.
attainted" and therefore civilly
dead. But sec. 1 of the
Forfeiture Act, in clear and
unambiguous language enacts that
" no confession, verdict,
inquest, conviction, or judgment
of or for " any treason or
felony or fela de .se
shall cause any attainder or "
corruption of blood."
A convicted
murderer under sentence of death
is therefore no longer "
attaint" by reason of such
conviction and sentence and the
ratio decidendi of \Vebb'
s case is gone, and there is no
longer any ban on the competency
of such a person "1,9 give
evidence.
