Baba Ijesha vs Princess: Justice defiled?

Social media in Nigeria has been awash recently with different sordid reports of one atrocity or the other. Among these numerous tales is that of Baba Ijesha and Princess.

The story and the drama that ensued is one that would give Nollywood scriptwriters a run for their money.

Nigerian comedienne cum actress Damilola Adekoya popularly known as “Princess” had cried out about how one of her colleagues, one Mr. Olanrewaju James also known as “Baba Ijesha” allegedly “raped” her daughter.

For those of us who don’t know, Baba Ijesha is a big name in the Yoruba movie sector of Nollywood.

The actor stands accused of sexually molesting one of Princess’s daughters. The child although not a biological child of the actress, is one of six children that has been living with her as their guardian since her divorce years back.

The story has it that the famous Yoruba actor had molested the poor child seven years ago, when she was barely seven years old and had warned her not to tell anybody about it. A warning she heeded faithfully until recently when she spoke to her guardian about the incident.

Upon hearing about the incident the actress set in motion a plan to catch Baba Ijesha in the act and obtain evidence for obvious reasons. She had closed circuit cameras installed in her house and then proceeded to invite Baba Ijesha over. She then left the child alone with Baba Ijesha – apparently, like goat to yam, the rest they say is history.

The story however took another dramatic twist on Thursday the 29^th of April 2021 when Princess stormed the Police Station in Panti alongside her friend and fellow actress Iyabo Ojo, to protest against the rumored release of the suspect.

Nigerians all over have questioned the morality and also the legality of the proposed release of the suspect, the punishment for his alleged crime amongst many other issues incidental to and arising.

This article attempts to address some of the legal issues arising from this sad tale and the correlating legal ramifications.

RAPE, SEXUAL ASSAULT AND DEFILMENT.

One of the confusion that has ensued is, the exact classification of the crime as allegedly committed by Baba Ijesha. While some have cried rape, others have opined that it’s “merely” sexual assault, some defilement.

Under the Criminal Code Act applicable in the southern part of Nigeria, RAPE is defined in Section 357 “as an act of any person who has unlawful carnal knowledge of a woman or knowledge of a girl, without her consent, or with her consent, if the consent is obtained by force or by means of threats of intimidation of any kinds or by fear of harm or by false and fraudulent representation as the nature of the act, or in the case of a married woman by personating her husband is guilty of an offence called rape.”

A more detailed and more contemporary law however would be the “Violence Against Persons (Prohibition) Act 2015.” Sadly, though it is only applicable in the federal capital territory and any other state which chooses to domesticate it (not a lot have).

INDECENT ASSAULT is any form of sexual contact or behavior that occurs and is geared towards sexual satisfaction without the consent of the other party. Section 360 of the Criminal Code prescribes 2 years’ imprisonment for the offence.

DEFILEMENT: Section 218 of the Criminal Code Act provides that “any person who has unlawful carnal knowledge of a girl under the age of thirteen is guilty of a felony and is liable to imprisonment for life with or without caning.”

While an attempt to have carnal knowledge of a girl under thirteen is punishable with fourteen years’ imprisonment. It is necessary to state at this point that consent is irrelevant at this age because the law presumes that the child does not have the requisite mental capacity to fully understand the act.

The Child Rights Act 2003 also prescribes 14 years’ imprisonment for any form of sexual exploitation of a minor that does not involve penal penetration.

Generally, statute of limitation does not apply for criminal cases however Section 218 of the Criminal Code provides that prosecution of any offence under the section must commence within two months after the offence is committed.

Now armed with the legal definitions of these terms, the question that arises is – “Which of these offences above should and can “Baba” be charged with?”

The short and simple answer is – “Any and All.”

The buck stops with the Lagos State Ministry of Justice. Having been apprised with the facts of the case and the evidence (or lack) thereof, they can charge “Baba” for any and all the offences depending on what they think they are capable of proving in court.

Another issue causing a stir is the alleged attempt by the Police to release the suspect. Sad to say but the cold truth is that Baba Ijesha is still only a suspect.

The legal system is structured in a way that, you can literally watch one person murder another, even have it on tape yet the culprit is only “a suspect.” While yes, the concept is both baffling, upsetting and hilarious, sadly, it is what it is!

Section 36(5) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 as amended, provides that everybody is “innocent until proven guilty.” The import being that all rights accrued to an innocent person still accrues to a “suspect”, one of such being – the right of liberty as graciously provided for by Section 35 of the said Constitution. So that the logic is – if you are presuming that somebody is innocent then you cannot lock him up (for more than 48 hours) like somebody who is guilty, without charging him to court. Seeing as Judiciary workers are on strike currently all over the country and courts are not in session, one may easily relate to the constraint faced by the Nigerian Police at the moment.

It is true that in this same Nigeria of ours we have seen, heard and had situations where people were locked up indefinitely without a guilty verdict. The most popular of these cases being those of; Elzalzaky, Dasuki, Olusola Babatunde amongst others. This has been given legality by virtue of the ruling of the Supreme Court in the case of “Asari Dokubo v. FRN”, where the apex court ruled that “where the freedom of an individual poses a threat to national security, his right to liberty can be abdicated.”

Purged of emotions and anger, we would all agree that Baba Ijesha is not a threat to national security.

“In real life”, what the Police is fond of doing in circumstances like this, is to go by a procedure known as “holding charge,” a process by which a suspect is brought before a magistrates’ court that lacks jurisdiction over the offense for which the suspect has been detained. The magistrate therefore cannot order his release, and has no option under the law but to remand him in custody on the basis of a holding charge, without any determination as to whether there are sufficient grounds for detention. But also too, seeing as courts are on strike even that controversial tactic is not even an available option.

Then there is the issue of the evidence of his guilt via confession as shown by the now viral video. There are quite a few spinoffs arising from this but one trite fact remains that; Baba Ijesha’s confession does not in any way equate or substitute for conviction. If in his statements to the police, Baba Ijesha goes to deny the allegations as the average mind would expect, then during trial, the said confession would come in handy, as long as the prosecution can prove that it was not obtained under duress or out rightly coerced.

The story is indeed a very sad one. The crime Baba Ijesha is accused of, is both heinous and disgraceful.

He stands accused of defiling a little child, the not so silent question that looms now is: “Will he defile Justice too?”

Time will tell!

Everything said and done, undisputedly, this brings to fore the urgent need for us all, individually and collectively to apply more caution and provide more protection for our young ones. Exploitation of these young ones generally and especially in the entertainment industry is an act that is common place, both sexually and otherwise, more than we care to talk about. It is my hope that this case will serve if nothing else, as a call to action that will culminate in stronger safeguards and stricter punishments for all those that will seek to take advantage of our children, male or female.