Double Jeopardy Across Borders: Evaluating Nigeria’s Legal Basis for Simon Ekpan’s Re-Prosecution for Terrorism in Nigeria
Ademola Yusuf Akintunde
Abstract
This article examines the constitutional guarantee against double jeopardy under Section 36(9) of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria vis-a-vis Simon Ekpan’s conviction in Finland for terrorism-related offences. It conducts an enquiry into the propensity of a retrial back home despite his prior conviction for virtually the same offence in Finland. This inquiry is situated within the broader principle of ‘ne bis in idem’ and draws upon Nigerian case laws, where courts have consistently barred re-prosecution of criminal offences arising from the same conduct. It further engages with international human rights instruments and case laws, particularly the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), both of which embed provisions against double jeopardy, while in addition to that, contain a caveat that the principle lacks extraterritorial effect. That is, the protection applies only within the jurisdiction of a single state and not across borders save and except where a regional instrument to that effect exists and is in operation. This article therefore demonstrates that the Nigerian constitutional law jurisprudence on double jeopardy aligns with international laws and global interpretations. It highlights the limit of the principle especially in relation to extraterritorial offences such as terrorism and money laundering and concludes that even though Simon Ekpan has been earlier convicted for terrorism in Finland, Nigeria is not under any legal obligation or impediment, domestic or international, to refrain from re-prosecution much more so where the impacts of the said offence fell squarely on Nigeria.
