Supreme Court Affirms Death Sentence on Maryam Sanda for Killing Husband

The Supreme Court of Nigeria has upheld the death sentence earlier handed to Maryam Sanda after she was convicted of culpable homicide for the killing of her husband, Bilyamin Bello, in their Abuja residence. The apex court delivered the decisive ruling in a split judgment of four to one, reaffirming the sentence passed by the FCT High Court.

Ejes Gist News reports that the five-member panel of justices dismissed Sanda’s appeal and sustained the conviction. The court held that the prosecution successfully proved its case beyond reasonable doubt, and that the findings of the high court and Court of Appeal were valid, credible, and supported by law.

The lead judgment, delivered by Justice Moore Adumein, stated that the evidence presented at trial established Sanda’s guilt and justified the sentence of death by hanging initially issued by the high court on January 27, 2020.

Also Read: How Bayelsa Deputy Governor Lawrence Ewhrudjakpo Slumped and Died After Refusing to Defect to APC

How the Supreme Court Ruled

In its judgment, the Supreme Court analysed all the issues raised by Sanda’s legal team in their bid to overturn the conviction. After reviewing witnesses’ testimony, forensic evidence, and the arguments presented at the appellate stages, the panel found no legal basis to interfere with the conclusions of the lower courts.

Key highlights of the ruling include:

• The trial court properly evaluated the evidence and reached a sound verdict.
• The Court of Appeal acted within the law when it upheld the death sentence.
• The prosecution proved that the stabbing that caused Bello’s death was intentional and deliberate.
• The defence failed to present a convincing alternative explanation capable of creating reasonable doubt.

The justices also addressed issues raised concerning the admissibility of specific evidence, procedural fairness, and the interpretation of the Criminal Code provisions relating to culpable homicide punishable by death.

The Case Background

The case dates back to 2017 when Sanda was accused of stabbing her husband, Bilyamin Bello, during a domestic dispute at their home in Abuja. Bello, the son of a former chairman of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), Haliru Bello, died from the injuries sustained in the incident.

The FCT High Court, presided over by Justice Yusuf Halilu, found Sanda guilty after a prolonged trial that included testimonies from police investigators, forensic pathologists, neighbours, and family members. The court ruled that the evidence presented pointed clearly to intentional homicide.

After her conviction, Sanda approached the Court of Appeal to challenge the judgment. However, the appellate court affirmed the ruling, leaving the Supreme Court as the final legal avenue available to her.

Tinubu’s Pardon and Supreme Court’s Position

One of the striking issues addressed in the Supreme Court ruling was the decision of President Bola Tinubu to grant Sanda a presidential pardon, reducing her punishment to a 12-year sentence after she had already served about six years and eight months in Suleja prison.

The apex court held that the President acted incorrectly by exercising executive clemency over a case that was still pending before the courts. According to the justices, granting a pardon during the pendency of an appeal interferes with judicial proceedings and violates the constitutional principle of separation of powers.

The judgment emphasized that presidential pardons apply only to concluded matters and cannot override an active legal process.

Federal Government Explains Reason for Clemency

Despite the Supreme Court’s position, senior officials in the Ministry of Justice had earlier defended the President’s decision. The Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Lateef Fagbemi (SAN), explained that Sanda was included in the list of persons considered for clemency on “compassionate grounds and in the best interest of the children.”

According to Fagbemi, Sanda exhibited several qualities that qualified her for consideration:

• Good conduct in prison
• Positive behavioural change
• Willingness to embrace a reformed lifestyle
• Serving as a model to other inmates
• Demonstration of remorsefulness

The AGF noted that the Advisory Council on Prerogative of Mercy reviewed her case and recommended a commuted sentence.

Legal and Constitutional Implications

Legal analysts have pointed to the significance of the Supreme Court’s ruling concerning executive powers. While the Constitution grants the President the authority to grant pardons, the judgment reinforces limits on such powers where judicial processes are still ongoing.

Key implications include:

1. Executive clemency cannot override pending judicial decisions
   The ruling clarifies that once a case is before the courts, the executive must refrain from actions that may disrupt or pre-empt the judicial outcome.
2. Presidential pardons must follow specific constitutional pathways
   The Advisory Council may recommend, but pardons must adhere to legal boundaries.
3. The judgment reasserts judicial independence
   By invalidating the premature pardon, the Supreme Court preserved the sanctity of adjudication.

Outcome of the Appeal

The Supreme Court’s dismissal of the appeal means that:

• The original sentence of death by hanging remains valid.
• The commuted 12-year term earlier announced by the President does not stand.
• Sanda’s legal options have reached a final conclusion under Nigerian law.

While the judgment affirms the conviction, implementation will follow due administrative processes involving correctional authorities and the Ministry of Justice.

Reactions Expected from Legal Community and Civil Groups

The reaffirmation of the death sentence has generated discussions across legal, human rights, and civil society circles. Many organisations monitoring death penalty cases in Nigeria are expected to issue position statements regarding the implications of the judgment on justice administration and human rights norms.

Advocates of criminal justice reform have raised concerns over the use of capital punishment, while others argue that the court’s decision reinforces accountability in cases of domestic violence resulting in death.

Government officials, security agencies, and justice sector institutions are also expected to respond to the ruling as its full impact becomes clearer.

Next Steps for the Justice Ministry

Following the Supreme Court ruling, the Ministry of Justice will need to:

• Update its records regarding the earlier commuted sentence.
• Issue formal communication to the Nigerian Correctional Service.
• Address potential administrative questions arising from the reversed pardon.
• Review similar cases to avoid constitutional conflicts involving pending appeals.

Legal experts predict that the government may issue new guidelines on executive clemency to ensure conformity with constitutional principles.