Maryam Sanda May Not Have Escaped Justice After All

Supreme Court Invalidates Maryam Sanda’s Pardon, Upholds Death Sentence

President Lacks Power to Grant Pardon While Appeal Is Pending — Court

The Supreme Court has upheld the death sentence imposed on Maryam Sanda in the culpable homicide case involving the killing of her husband, Bilyaminu Bello, thereby invalidating the presidential pardon earlier granted to her.

In a split decision of four to one, the five justices of the apex court reaffirmed that the sentence of death by hanging earlier imposed on Sanda remains valid and enforceable.

The court dismissed all the arguments advanced by the appellant to overturn her conviction and accordingly struck out the appeal, holding that it lacked merit.

Delivering the lead judgment, Justice Moore Adumein held that the prosecution proved its case against Maryam Sanda beyond reasonable doubt. He further ruled that the judgment of the Court of Appeal, which affirmed the decision of the trial court, was sound and free from any legal error.

In a significant constitutional clarification, the Supreme Court held that the President should not exercise executive powers to grant pardon or amnesty in a culpable homicide case while an appeal is still pending. The court stated that such an action amounts to an improper exercise of executive authority in an ongoing criminal matter.

Maryam Sanda was arrested in November 2017 following the stabbing death of her husband, Bilyaminu Bello, the son of former chairman of the People’s Democratic Party (PDP), Haliru Bello. In January 2020, the Federal Capital Territory High Court, Abuja, found her guilty of culpable homicide and sentenced her to death by hanging. The trial judge ruled that the evidence before the court clearly established her guilt and described the case as a necessary warning against the growing incidence of spousal violence in the country.

In October this year, President Bola Ahmed Tinubu included Maryam Sanda among individuals granted pardon and clemency, a decision that generated widespread public criticism. The Presidency later explained that the pardon was based on her alleged remorse and good conduct while in custody, and her sentence was reportedly commuted to 12 years, considering the nearly seven years she had already spent at the Suleja Correctional Centre.

However, the Supreme Court’s ruling has now effectively nullified that pardon, reaffirming the supremacy of judicial process over executive intervention in pending criminal appeals.

Divine Kristien!