“Protect Child Witness From Trauma” — Court Fixes October 13 To Hear Application In Pastor’s Alleged Rape Trial

The Federal Capital Territory (FCT) High Court in Gwarinpa, Abuja, has scheduled a hearing for an application seeking special protective measures for a 14-year-old alleged rape victim who is set to testify against an Abuja-based pastor. This development highlights Nigeria's evolving legal framework for vulnerable witnesses, particularly children, in criminal proceedings. The application, grounded in statutes like the Administration of Criminal Justice Act 2015 and the Child Rights Act 2003, aims to shield the child from potential trauma and intimidation during trial, balancing the accused's right to a fair hearing with the paramount interest of the child's welfare and dignity.

The Nigerian legal landscape is increasingly focused on safeguarding vulnerable individuals within the criminal justice system. A recent development at the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) High Court in Gwarinpa, Abuja, underscores this commitment, as Judge Modupe Osho-Adebiyi set October 13 for the hearing of an application seeking special protection for a 14-year-old alleged rape victim. This child is slated to testify against an Abuja-based pastor accused of sexual assault, and the court's prompt attention to the protective application signals a critical juncture in balancing justice for victims with the rights of the accused. The judge's emphasis on a swift conclusion to the trial, coupled with the need to shield the child from trauma, reflects a broader legal and societal imperative to create a more compassionate environment for child witnesses.

The protection of child witnesses in Nigeria is governed by a confluence of statutory provisions designed to mitigate the inherent vulnerabilities associated with their participation in legal proceedings. Key among these are the Child Rights Act 2003, the Evidence Act 2011, and the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA) 2015. The Child Rights Act, enacted to domesticate the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, establishes the best interests of the child as paramount in all actions concerning them and prohibits exposing children to unnecessary publicity, while requiring confidentiality in proceedings involving child victims. The Evidence Act 2011, particularly Section 209, addresses the competency of child witnesses, stipulating that a child who has attained the age of fourteen years shall generally give sworn evidence, provided they possess sufficient intelligence to justify the reception of their evidence and understand the duty of speaking the truth. For children under fourteen, unsworn evidence may be received under similar conditions, though it often requires corroboration. The ACJA 2015, a landmark legislation, further buttresses these protections by providing specific measures for vulnerable witnesses.

The application before the FCT High Court seeks to invoke the protective provisions enshrined in Nigerian law, particularly Sections 232 and 233 of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA) 2015, alongside Sections 38, 204, and 205 of the Child Rights Act 2003. Section 232 of the ACJA 2015 is pivotal, empowering courts to adopt various protective measures for vulnerable witnesses, especially in cases involving sexual offences. These measures can include receiving evidence by video link, permitting the witness to be screened or masked, conducting proceedings in camera (excluding the public and press), and restraining the publication of identifying information about the victim. The prosecution's request for the child's testimony to be taken "by video link, behind a screen, or other method that the court deems fit" and for in-camera proceedings directly aligns with these statutory provisions.

This approach aims to strike a delicate balance between the accused's constitutional right to a fair hearing, as guaranteed by Section 36(4) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999, and the imperative to protect the child from further psychological trauma and intimidation. The prosecution argued that such measures would not prejudice the defendant's rights, as he would still be able to hear the testimony and challenge it through cross-examination. The court's discretion in applying these measures is broad, allowing for tailored protection based on the specific circumstances of each case. While the 14-year-old victim falls into the category of a child who would typically give sworn evidence under the Evidence Act 2011, the focus of the application is on the *manner* of testimony rather than its admissibility or competency, acknowledging the unique emotional and psychological impact of sexual assault trials on minors.

However, the effective implementation of these protective measures can face practical challenges, including the availability of necessary technological infrastructure like video-link facilities and consistent power supply in courtrooms. Furthermore, while the ACJA and Child Rights Act provide a robust framework, the process of determining a child's competency and the depth of inquiries can still be intimidating, potentially hindering truthful testimony. The ongoing efforts by Nigerian courts to adopt these special measures signify a progressive shift towards a more victim-centric criminal justice system, aligning with international best practices for the treatment of child victims and witnesses.

The FCT High Court's decision to hear the application for special protection for the child witness in the alleged rape trial is a significant step towards reinforcing the rights and welfare of vulnerable persons in Nigeria's judicial system. For legal practitioners, this case underscores the increasing importance of understanding and effectively utilizing the protective provisions within the Administration of Criminal Justice Act 2015 and the Child Rights Act 2003. Lawyers, whether prosecuting or defending, must be adept at navigating these provisions, ensuring that the rights of all parties are upheld while prioritizing the psychological well-being of child witnesses. The judicious application of measures such as in-camera proceedings, video links, and identity concealment is crucial for fostering an environment where child victims can give evidence without undue distress.

Moving forward, legal professionals should anticipate a continued emphasis on these protective measures, particularly in sensitive cases involving children and sexual offences. It is imperative for the judiciary to be adequately equipped with the necessary infrastructure to implement these provisions effectively. This case serves as a reminder that the pursuit of justice must extend beyond mere conviction or acquittal, encompassing the holistic protection and rehabilitation of victims. Practitioners should stay abreast of judicial interpretations and evolving practices in this area, advocating for reforms that further streamline and strengthen witness protection mechanisms to ensure that justice is not only served but also perceived as fair and humane for all.