by Ayokunle Odekunle

Are you an aspiring armed robber? Do you look up to armed robbers as role models? Well I have news for you. The offence of armed robbery carries a MANDATORY sentence of death and guess what? You do not have to kill anyone or shoot  or stab anyone before you are convicted. All you need do is to ensure you commit a robbery with a weapon. You are dead. It is that simple.

Kabiru, a 26 year old graduate of  ‘Advanced Yoruba History’ from the Obafemi Awolowo University, Ile-Ife has been without a job since he finished in 2005. He ‘knew’ his girlfriend, Salimotu and got her pregnant. His aged parents in the village are making endless demands from him and he has nothing to offer them. He is under insane pressure.

One day, he meets his childhood friends; Sule, Taju, Kamoru and Opalaba. His friends were looking all sweet and prim. He asked them to ‘show him the way’. They inform him that they are robbers and for him to be like them, he has to do what they do. Pronto, he joins them.

Their first operation was to rob a First Generation Bank. Sule was armed an an AK-47 gun, Taju had a machete, Kamoru had a Broken bottle while Opalaba had a dane gun. Kabiru was unarmed. Upon getting to the bank, they asked everyone to lie flat and then made for the vault. No one was harmed in the entire operation, but as they tried to make their way out of the bank with the money they had stolen, they were arrested by men of the Special Armed Robbery Squad.

They were arraigned before the Lagos State High Court for armed robbery.

Kabiru’s lawyer, Mosafejo Esq told the court that since his client was not armed during the robbery, he should be tried for robbery, and not armed robbery. Counsel for Sule, Taju, Kamoru and Opalaba contended that as long as his clients had shot no one and had beaten no one, they should also be tried for the offence of robbery. Their counsel, Ajakaiye Esq further asserted that before one can be convicted for armed robbery, the weapons must have been used on victims of the robbery.

The prosecution however disagreed. Prosecution counsel, Mr. No-Nonsense Esq told the Court that as long as a robber was armed, he is guilty of armed robbery irrespective of whether someone was harmed or not. He further argued that so long as Kabiru was in the company of his colleagues who were armed, he was liable for armed robbery as well.

The Judge upon considering the arguments of Counsel on all sides convicted all parties for armed robbery and sentenced them to death by hanging.

Kabiru and others want to lodge an appeal.

WHAT ARE THE ISSUES HERE?

• What constitutes armed robbery?
• Should Kabiru have been convicted for armed robbery even when he was unarmed?
• Should Kamoru, Sule, Opalaba  and Taju have been convicted for armed robbery even when no one was harmed by their arms?
• Should the Judge have sentenced them to death even though they did not take any life?

ISSUE 1

Section 401 of the Criminal Code basically defines robbery as the stealing of anything with the actual or threat of the use of violence. If I go to a store, beat up the store-keeper and then walk away with the store’s property, I am guilty of robbery. Section 402(2) however draws the line between ‘Robbery’ and ‘Armed robbery’. It says

“If any offender is armed with any firearm or any offensive weapon or any obnoxious or chemical materials… he is guilty of ARMED ROBBERY”

If Kabiru and co had gone to that bank with a toy gun, will be toy gun be an offensive weapon as used in Section 402(2)? No. The criminal code defines firearms as “Canon, gun, flint-lock gun, revolver, pistol, explosive or ammunition or any other firearms”. Offensive weapons are described as ” any article, apart from a gun, made or adapted for use for causing injury to the person… and it includes air gun, air pistol, bow and arrow, spear, cutlass, matchet, dagger, cudgel or any piece of wood, metal, glass or stone capable pf being used as an offensive weapon”.

So had Kabiru and co gone to rob with a toy gun, they will not be guilty of ARMED ROBBERY as the toy gun cannot fall under the category of ‘FIREARMS’ or ‘OFFENSIVE WEAPON’ as used above.

To resolve issue 1, they are guilty of armed robbery as they went to commit ROBBERY in the Bank while ARMED with an offensive weapon.

ISSUE 2 – Should Kabiru have been convicted for armed robbery even when he was unarmed?

Kabiru was in the company of the robbers but he was not armed. It is therefore his lawyer’s contention that he ought to be arraigned for robbery and not armed robbery. His Lawyer, Mosafejo Esq has argued quite brilliantly, urging the court to hold that his client is not an armed robber. But what is the position of the Law?

Section 2 of the Robbery and Firearms (Special provisions) Act provides that any person who is armed with any firearms or any offensive weapon or WHO IS IN COMPANY of any such person has committed the offence of armed robbery.

In Adeyemi & Ors V State N.W.L.R. (Pt. 170) 679, the Supreme Court held that a person who took part in a robbery even if he is not armed is guilty of the offence of armed robbery.

Thus in the instant case, Kabiru’s defence holds no water. Once it is established by the prosecution that Kabiru was among the robbers who were armed, was at the locus criminus,  by common design, he is guilty of armed robbery. Condemning him for armed robbery is only the commendable thing to do

ISSUE THREE- Should Kamoru, Sule, Opalaba  and Taju have been convicted for armed robbery even when no one was harmed by their arms?

It is the contention of the Counsel of the accused persons that they should not have been convicted since they did not harm anyone with their weapons.The Law is however trite. To prove the offence of Armed Robbery, the prosecution does not have to prove that blood was shed or that someone was harmed.

To secure a conviction of armed robbery, the prosecution has to prove the following:

• The accused was armed with any firearms or offensive weapon or chemical or obnoxious material
• The person even if he is not armed must  be in the company of  armed people.

In fact, the Supreme Court has held that violence does not need to be proven. See  Yinusa Ajiloye V. State (1983) 6 S.C. per Obaseki J.S.C. It is enough that the robbers were armed.

I think the rationale behind this is that the Law assumes that by taking dangerous weapons to rob, the robber has the intention to use it especially if he faces some ‘resistance’ from the owner of the property.

ISSUE 4

Should the Judge have sentenced them to death even when they have not murdered anybody?

Yes!

Once the prosecution proves its case beyond reasonable doubt,  it is mandatory that the Judge sentences them to death. See Section 402 of the Criminal Code, Section 2 of the Robbery and Firearms Act.

CONCLUSION

When next you are a witness to the scenario painted above and the Judge sentences them to death, despair not. This is the Law and it must be obeyed strictly.

Are you an aspiring armed robber? Do you look up to armed robbers as role models? Well I have news for you. The offence of armed robbery carries a MANDATORY sentence of death and guess what? You do not have to kill anyone or shot  or stab anyone before you are convicted. All you need do is to ensure you commit a robbery with a weapon. You are dead. It is that simple.

Make your choices wisely.

——————–

Lawyer by day, Editor and writer by night, Ayokunle Odekunle is a Graduate of the University of Ibadan where he was the Most Outstanding Student for the year 2011. A Counsel in one of the Biggest firms in the Country and an Editor in the Best Internet Newspaper in the Country, Ayokunle is a Chartered Arbitrator. He is very ambitious and wants to be everything before death comes . He tweets from @Oddy4real