By OLUSOJI DAOMI
Imagine two men arguing outside a beer parlour in Ikorodu. Voices rise. One man suddenly slaps the other. There is silence for a moment. Then the second man reaches into his pocket, brings out a knife and stabs him.
By evening, one man is in hospital and the other is at the police station. The inevitable question follows: “But he attacked me first. Was I not defending myself?” This is where many Nigerians misunderstand self-defence.
Yes, Nigerian law recognises the right of a person to defend himself against unlawful violence. But self defence is not a licence for revenge. It is not a legal permit to punish somebody because he offended you. And it certainly does not mean that once somebody touches you, you can respond with whatever weapon happens to be available.
The law is concerned with something more precise: Was the force used reasonably necessary to defend against the attack at that moment?
Under section 286 of the Criminal Code applicable in the Southern States, where a person is unlawfully assaulted and has not provoked the assault, the law permits him to use such force as is reasonably necessary to make an effective defence, subject to important limitations. Ordinarily, the force used must not be intended or likely to cause death or grievous harm. However, where the nature of the assault creates a reasonable apprehension of death or grievous harm, and the person reasonably believes that he cannot otherwise preserve himself or another from that danger, the law permits force necessary for that defence, even where death or grievous harm results. That distinction is fundamental.
A slap and an attempt to stab somebody are not automatically treated as equivalent forms of violence. But neither should the public imagine that the law works by a mechanical formula in which every slap permits only another slap, or every punch permits only another punch. Self defence is determined from the circumstances of the particular case.
The Supreme Court has made this clear in cases concerning self defence. In Apugo v The State, the Court considered the requirements of section 286 and emphasised the importance of necessity and the circumstances in which the force was used.
There is, however, a fascinating Nigerian case which demonstrates why social media slogans are dangerous substitutes for legal reasoning.
In Apugo v The State, the evidence accepted by the lower court was that the deceased had first slapped the appellant, who responded with fist blows. The Supreme Court noted that there was no evidence establishing that the appellant had reacted disproportionately or used more force than was necessary in the circumstances as found by the lower court.
The lesson is not that “a slap gives you the right to beat someone.” That would be a dangerous distortion of the case. The lesson is that the court examines what actually happened, the nature of the attack, the response, the surrounding circumstances and whether the force used was reasonably necessary.
Now imagine a different scenario. A man slaps you at a bus stop in Oshodi. He walks away. You go after him, pull out a knife and stab him. That begins to look very different from a situation in which someone attacks you with a knife, you struggle to escape and, in the process of protecting yourself, you use force that unfortunately causes serious injury.
Why?
Because defence and retaliation are different legal concepts. Defence is about stopping an unlawful attack. Retaliation is about paying somebody back. The law protects the former. It does not give citizens a private criminal justice system.
This is why section 287 of the Criminal Code is also important. It deals with circumstances where the person defending himself had himself unlawfully assaulted another or provoked an assault. Even then, the law may recognise self defence where the subsequent violence creates a reasonable apprehension of death or grievous harm and the force used is reasonably necessary for preservation. But the statutory conditions are important, including circumstances concerning the continuation of the conflict.
So, the Nigerian who says, “He started it, so I can finish it,” should be careful. That is not necessarily the law. The law does not ask only who threw the first punch. It may also ask what you did afterwards. Did you genuinely need to use that level of force to protect yourself? Was the danger still present? Could the attack reasonably have been stopped without resort to deadly or grievous force? Had the danger ended before you launched your response? These are factual questions. Courts do not decide them from WhatsApp narratives or neighbourhood gossip.
Consider the classic Nigerian quarrel. Two neighbours fight over a parking space. One pushes the other. The other picks up a heavy object and strikes him repeatedly after he has already fallen.
The first push may have been unlawful. But that does not automatically immunise everything that follows. A person cannot ordinarily convert a right of self protection into a right of punishment. This is also why citizens should understand the difference between provocation and self defence. They are not the same thing.
The Criminal Code contains separate provisions dealing with provocation. Section 284 recognises a defence to certain assaults where a person is actually deprived of self control by provocation and acts suddenly before the passion has cooled, but it expressly limits the protection where the force is disproportionate or intended or likely to cause death or grievous harm.
In other words, Nigerian criminal law recognises that human beings sometimes react violently when provoked. But the law does not simply say, “You were angry, therefore you are innocent.” Anger is not a legal defence to everything.
There is another important point that Nigerians often overlook. The burden of proving the ingredients of a criminal offence remains on the prosecution. The fact that an accused person raises self defence does not mean that the prosecution is suddenly relieved of its fundamental burden. Nigerian appellate authority has recognised this principle.
And there is a further lesson for anyone who finds himself in such a situation. Do not manufacture evidence after the event. Do not tell your friends to lie. Do not delete threatening messages. Do not create a WhatsApp conversation that never existed. Do not instruct witnesses to give a particular story.
If the matter reaches court, the surrounding evidence may become crucial: medical reports, photographs, CCTV footage, eyewitness testimony, messages, physical injuries, the weapon allegedly used, the conduct of the parties before and after the incident and the accused person’s own account.
The court is interested in what actually happened. Not what makes the best Facebook post. Not what sounds most convincing at the beer parlour. Not what the family WhatsApp group has decided. And this brings us to the uncomfortable question with which we began. If someone slaps you, can you stab him? The responsible legal answer is: not simply because he slapped you.
Section 286 does not confer a general right to respond to every unlawful assault with whatever force you choose. The force must be reasonably necessary for effective defence, subject to the statutory exceptions where there is reasonable apprehension of death or grievous harm and the necessary conditions are satisfied.
The law therefore recognises something both simple and profound. You have a right to protect yourself. You do not have an unlimited right to punish your attacker. Sometimes the wisest act of self defence is to create distance, escape, call for help and report the matter.
Because there is a point at which the person defending himself may become the person standing in the dock. And when that happens, the question may no longer be, “Who slapped whom first?” It may become: “Was what you did genuinely necessary to defend yourself, or had self defence already ended and retaliation begun?” That is where the law draws its line.
And sometimes, that line is the difference between walking home and walking into a criminal trial.
READ ALSO:
Dotun Oladipo: NGE mourns exit of a gentleman, great journalist
Dotun Oladipo: ‘A ma dupe lowo thank God’ has been silenced
67 Nigerians return from South Africa
Mammoth crowd as PDP flags off presidential, NASS campaigns in Ogun Central
Troops rescue two kidnap victims in Plateau
Tinubu mourns The Eagle Online publisher, Dotun Oladipo
GOCOP mourns former president, Dotun Oladipo
Zenith Bank rallies trade leaders behind value addition in Nigeria’s non-oil exports
