Prominent Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN) and constitutional lawyer Mike Ozekhome has strongly criticized the Supreme Court’s decision to affirm the death sentence of Adamawa Christian farmer Sunday Jackson..CONTINUE FULL READING>>>>>
Jackson was convicted for defending himself against a killer herdsman, Ardo Bawuro, in an altercation on his farmland over 10 years ago.
In a ruling on March 7, 2025, the apex court upheld a lower court decision sentencing Jackson to death by hanging, sparking widespread outrage and concerns about fairness and the fundamental right to self-defense. Ozekhome argued that the court’s conclusion raised serious questions about judicial reasoning and the realities of violent encounters.
The senior lawyer noted that Jackson’s claim of self-defense was consistent and straightforward, and that the stabbing occurred during a physical struggle. Ozekhome criticized the court’s notion that Jackson had the opportunity to flee while entangled in a fight with an armed opponent, calling it “speculative” and “a dangerous oversimplification of a clear and perfect danger to his life.”
It violated the constitution by delivering judgment 167 days after the close of the argument, when it had a maximum of 90 days
Moreover, Ozekhome pointed out that the Supreme Court erred in its handling of the case, stating that it violated the constitution by delivering judgment 167 days after the close of the argument, when it had a maximum of 90 days. This criticism adds to the growing concerns about the court’s decision and its implications for justice and human rights in Nigeria.
The case has sparked widespread outrage, with many questioning the fairness of the justice system and the court’s understanding of the realities of violent encounters.
As the debate continues, Ozekhome’s criticism of the Supreme Court’s decision highlights the need for a more nuanced approach to self-defense cases and the importance of considering the complexities of real-life violence.
