One of the common tactics employed by defence counsel in criminal trials is filing interlocutory appeals and urging the trial court to pause proceedings pending the outcome of the appeal. But is this tactic legally allowed under Nigerian criminal procedure law?
In the case of SUNNY v. Inspector General of Police (2018) LPELR-50097(CA), the Court of Appeal was called upon to clarify whether a trial court is bound to halt criminal proceedings simply because an interlocutory appeal has been entered.
The Argument on Stay of Proceedings
The Appellant’s counsel had argued that by virtue of Order 4 Rule 11 of the Court of Appeal Rules 2011, once an appeal has been entered, the trial court loses jurisdiction and must stay proceedings until the appeal is determined. This rule provides that after an appeal is entered, all applications in the matter must be made to the Court of Appeal, not the lower court.
However, the Court of Appeal disagreed with this interpretation, especially in the context of criminal trials.
The Position of the Law under the ACJA
The Court emphasized the overriding provisions of Section 306 of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA), 2015, which categorically states:
“An application for stay of proceedings in respect of a criminal matter before the Court shall not be entertained.”
This means that Nigerian trial courts handling criminal matters cannot entertain or grant applications for stay of proceedings. This provision was designed to curb the practice of using interlocutory appeals to delay criminal trials unnecessarily.
Supporting Authorities
The Court referenced its earlier decision in MUSTAPHA v. FRN (2017) LPELR-43131(CA), where it held that:
Once no specific order for stay has been granted, a criminal trial must proceed uninterrupted, even where an appeal is pending. Both the ACJA and the Administration of Criminal Justice Law of Lagos State 2011 (for Lagos State matters) strictly prohibit stay of proceedings in criminal trials. Even appellate courts cannot entertain applications for stay in criminal matters before judgment at the trial level.
Additionally, the Court cited Section 40 of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) Act, 2004, which echoes the same principle: no stay of proceedings shall be entertained in EFCC criminal matters until the High Court delivers its final judgment.
The Court’s Final Word
Justice Jamilu Yammama Tukur, JCA, delivering the leading judgment, concluded:
“In light of the above, I see nothing wrong with the decision of the trial Court to continue with the trial despite the entry of an interlocutory appeal in the absence of an order specifically staying the proceedings of the lower Court.”
The Court further highlighted that this approach aligns with the broader objectives of criminal justice reforms in Nigeria: expediting trials, minimizing delays, and preventing abuse of court processes.
Key Takeaway
For lawyers and litigants alike, the decision in Sunny v. I.G.P reinforces a critical point of Nigerian criminal procedure:
Filing an interlocutory appeal does not, by itself, stop an ongoing criminal trial. Unless there is a specific and valid court order staying proceedings (which is now largely prohibited by law), criminal trials must proceed without delay.
Disclaimer:
This post is for general information purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For specific advice on the stay of criminal proceedings pending Appeal or any related litigation, please consult a qualified Nigerian lawyer.
If you found this helpful, please share it on social media — it only takes a click.