STATUTORY PUNISHMENTS IN NIGERIAN CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM: LEGISLATIVE INTENT VS JUDICIAL PRACTICE

Abstract

The jurisprudence of criminal law across legal systems demonstrates that punishment occupies a fundamental position in the pursuit of order, peace, and justice. Within the Nigerian criminal justice system, punishment represents the legislature’s formal expression of penal philosophy, as accommodated by the Constitution and reflected in the maxim nulla poena sine lege. By prescribing punishments for prohibited acts, the legislature seeks to achieve the established objectives of criminal punishment. Accordingly, statutory punishments, whether mandatory or discretionary, are provided under penal legislation to guide courts in the sentencing process. In recent times, however, the application of certain statutory punishments by Nigerian courts has witnessed judicial practices that appear to depart from legislative intent. This paper examines the jurisprudence of statutory punishment within the Nigerian criminal justice system, with particular emphasis on the tension between legislative intent and judicial practice and its attendant consequences. The paper adopts a doctrinal research methodology, employing analytical and descriptive approaches. The findings reveal that courts have, in certain circumstances, departed from the strict application of statutory punishments due to concerns relating to international human rights standards, the interests of crime victims, and the perceived ineffectiveness of particular forms of punishment. The study recommends, among other measures, the strict application of statutory punishments by courts during sentencing pending clear legislative amendments that expressly accommodate applicable international human rights standards and the legitimate interests of crime victims.