By Oluwaleye Adedoyin Grace
![](https://thenigerialawyer.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/09/2026-IDRI-Masterclass.png")
INTRODUCTION
On 29 September 2026, the Edo State Special Criminal Court sentenced four persons to death by hanging for offences arising from kidnapping, armed robbery, cultism and unlawful possession of firearms. The judgment followed an 11-count charge in connection with a kidnapping incident at the Vegetable Market, off Airport Road, Benin City.
The judgment has once again brought Nigeria’s death penalty into public attention. However, a death sentence pronounced by a court does not necessarily mean that the convict will be executed immediately. Between the pronouncement of a death sentence and its actual execution lies a legal process involving the right of appeal, the relevant executive authority and the issuance of a warrant for execution.
The important question, therefore, is not merely whether a Nigerian court can sentence a person to death, but what happens after the judge says “to be hanged”?
WHAT DOES A DEATH SENTENCE MEAN UNDER NIGERIAN LAW?
Nigeria is a retentionist state, meaning that although the death penalty remains legally available, its use is subject to the requirements of Nigerian law. Section 33(1) of the 1999 Constitution protects the right to life but expressly permits deprivation of life pursuant to a sentence of a court in respect of a criminal offence for which the person has been found guilty.
Accordingly, a death sentence is not simply an order that a person should die. It is a judicial punishment imposed after conviction for a capital offence. Depending on the applicable law, offences capable of attracting the death penalty include murder, certain forms of culpable homicide, treason and certain forms of armed robbery. The applicable criminal legislation depends, among other things, on the jurisdiction and the offence involved.
Thus, when a court says that a convict is to be hanged, the legal journey has not necessarily ended. The next question is what the law requires before that sentence can actually be executed.
WHAT HAPPENS IMMEDIATELY AFTER A DEATH SENTENCE?
The pronouncement of a death sentence does not bring the legal process to an immediate end. Although the court has determined the punishment following conviction, the convict retains the right to challenge the decision through the appellate process. The Constitution guarantees a right of appeal in criminal proceedings, including cases where a High Court has imposed a sentence of death.[i]
The first important step, therefore, is the opportunity to appeal against the conviction, the sentence, or both. An appeal may challenge the evidence relied upon by the trial court, the interpretation or application of the law, the procedure adopted during the trial, or the appropriateness and legality of the sentence imposed. Where the case proceeds beyond the Court of Appeal, the Supreme Court may, in appropriate circumstances, become the final appellate court.
This is significant because a person sentenced to death is not ordinarily regarded as having exhausted all legal remedies merely because the trial court has pronounced the sentence. The appellate courts have the power to affirm the conviction and sentence, set them aside, order a retrial where legally justified, or substitute an appropriate sentence where the circumstances and law permit.
The law therefore creates a distinction between sentencing and execution. A death sentence may be pronounced by the trial court, but its implementation is subject to further legal requirements. The existence of a right of appeal is particularly important because execution before the determination of a properly instituted appeal could defeat the purpose of the appellate process.
Accordingly, following the recent Edo State judgment, the immediate legal question is not simply whether the four convicts have been sentenced to death. It is whether they have exercised, or still have time to exercise, their appellate rights and whether the judicial process has reached its lawful conclusion.
In other words, a death sentence begins another stage of the legal process; it does not necessarily mark its end.
THE DEATH WARRANT: WHO AUTHORIZES THE EXECUTION?
A death sentence pronounced by a court is not, by itself, an instruction to immediately carry out an execution. Nigerian law prescribes further formalities before a death sentence can be implemented. Section 368(1) of the Criminal Procedural Act provides that where a sentence of death has been passed, it shall only be carried out in accordance with the provisions governing its execution.[ii]
The role of the trial judge after sentencing is therefore different from that of the authority responsible for the subsequent implementation of the sentence. Under section 370 of the Criminal Procedural Act, after a death sentence has been pronounced, the presiding judge is required to forward to the Governor a copy of the finding and sentence, together with the judge’s notes of evidence and any recommendations or observations considered appropriate.[iii]
This is significant because it demonstrates that the process does not end when the judge says, in the traditional formulation, that the convict is to be hanged. The sentence enters a further legal and administrative stage. The convict remains in custody while the relevant statutory procedures are followed.
The Constitution also recognises an executive dimension to the treatment of a death sentence. Section 212 empowers the Governor of a State, in appropriate cases, to grant a pardon, respite, substitute a less severe punishment or remit the whole or part of a punishment imposed for an offence against the law of the State.[iv] For offences against federal law, the corresponding power is vested in the President under section 175 of the Constitution.[v]
Thus, the legal position is more nuanced than the words “sentenced to death” might suggest. The court determines guilt and imposes the sentence; the subsequent implementation of that sentence is governed by additional statutory and constitutional procedures.
This distinction is particularly important in understanding what happens to the four convicts in the recent Edo case. Their sentences may be severe, but the law still provides a process between the pronouncement of sentence and any eventual execution.
THE GOVERNOR’S POWER: PARDON, COMMUTATION AND RESPITE
Even after a court has imposed a sentence of death, the law recognises circumstances in which the punishment may be altered or suspended through the exercise of the prerogative of mercy. For a conviction arising under State law, this power is vested in the Governor by section 212 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended).[vi]
The Governor may grant a person a pardon, either unconditionally or subject to lawful conditions. The Governor may also grant a respite, substitute a less severe punishment for the punishment imposed by the court, or remit the whole or part of the punishment.[vii] These powers are collectively important because they mean that a death sentence pronounced by a court is not necessarily incapable of being modified after judgment.
A distinction should, however, be made between judicial determination and executive clemency. The Governor does not sit as an appellate court and does not determine whether the convict was properly convicted. Questions concerning the correctness of the conviction or sentence ordinarily belong to the appellate courts. The prerogative of mercy operates differently: it provides an executive mechanism through which an existing punishment may, within constitutional limits, be pardoned, reduced, suspended or otherwise modified.
The Constitution equally provides a corresponding power at the federal level. Under section 175, the President may grant a pardon, grant a respite from the execution of a punishment, substitute a less severe punishment, or remit the whole or part of a punishment imposed for an offence created by an Act of the National Assembly.[viii] The President exercises these powers after consultation with the Council of State.[ix]
Therefore, where a person has been sentenced to death, there may be more than one possible legal route before the punishment can ultimately be carried out: the appellate process may still be available, and the constitutional power of mercy may also become relevant.
This reinforces the central point of this article: a death sentence is a serious judicial pronouncement, but it is not synonymous with immediate execution. Nigerian law provides several legal stages and safeguards between the courtroom and the actual carrying out of the sentence.
WHAT IF THE CONVICT APPEALS?
A person sentenced to death does not lose the right to challenge the conviction simply because the punishment imposed is death. The Constitution expressly recognises a right of appeal in criminal proceedings in which the Federal High Court or a High Court has imposed a sentence of death.[x] The appeal may question the conviction, the sentence, or both, depending on the grounds available to the appellant.
This is particularly important in capital cases because the consequence of an erroneous conviction cannot be reversed after execution. The appellate process therefore provides an opportunity for a higher court to examine whether the trial court properly applied the law and whether the conviction was supported by the evidence.
The Nigerian Supreme Court has previously emphasized the importance of this protection. In Bello v Attorney-General, Oyo State, the Court held that executing a person before the determination of his pending appeal would infringe his constitutional right to life and his right to prosecute the appeal.[xi] The decision demonstrates that the right of appeal in a capital case is not merely procedural; it has direct consequences for whether the sentence can lawfully be carried out.
The implication is straightforward: where a competent appeal is properly pending, execution should not take place before the appeal is determined. The appellate process must therefore be allowed to run its course before the State proceeds to the irreversible step of execution.
This point is especially relevant to the four persons recently sentenced to death by the Edo State Special Criminal Court. Following the judgment, they may challenge the decision through the appropriate appellate process. Reports following the judgment have also quoted legal practitioners cautioning the Edo State Government against taking steps to execute the convicts before their right of appeal has been exhausted.[xii]
The law therefore places an important pause between “sentenced to death” and “executed.” Until the applicable appellate process has been concluded, the death sentence remains subject to judicial scrutiny.
NIGERIA’S DEATH-ROW REALITY
While Nigerian courts continue to impose death sentences, actual executions have become exceedingly rare. Nigeria has not carried out an execution since 2016, even though courts continue to sentence people to death. The European Union Agency for Asylum reported that Nigerian courts issued more than 246 death sentences in 2023, while over 3,400 people were on death row as of 2024.
More recent figures published by Amnesty International show that Nigeria recorded at least 243 death sentences in 2025, with at least 3,833 people remaining under sentence of death at the end of that year. No execution was recorded in Nigeria in 2025.
These figures reveal an important distinction between retaining the death penalty in law and actually carrying it out in practice. A person may receive a death sentence from a court and spend many years on death row without the sentence being executed. Some cases remain subject to appeals, while others may eventually become candidates for commutation, pardon or other forms of executive intervention.
The prolonged existence of death-row inmates also raises questions about the effectiveness of Nigeria’s capital punishment system. If courts continue to impose death sentences but executions remain suspended in practice, the legal system must confront the consequences of maintaining thousands of people under sentences that may never be carried out.
The recent Edo judgment therefore forms part of a much larger Nigerian reality. The four convicts have been sentenced to death, but that pronouncement must be understood within a system where the imposition of the death penalty and its actual execution are two very different stages of the law.
THE CONSTITUTIONAL AND HUMAN-RIGHTS QUESTION
The death penalty inevitably raises questions about the right to life and the dignity of the human person. Under section 33(1) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999, every person has a right to life, but the Constitution expressly permits deprivation of life pursuant to the execution of a sentence of a court in respect of a criminal offence for which the person has been found guilty.[xiii] Thus, the Constitution does not abolish capital punishment; rather, it recognises a limited exception to the general protection of life.
The legality of the death penalty, however, does not remove the requirement for due process. A capital conviction must follow a lawful trial in which the accused enjoys the constitutional guarantees of fair hearing.[xiv] This is particularly important because the punishment is irreversible. An error in the conviction cannot be corrected after an execution has taken place.
The issue also has an international dimension. Nigeria is a party to the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, which protects the right to life and prohibits arbitrary deprivation of life.[xv] International human-rights standards have increasingly encouraged States that retain capital punishment to restrict its application and ensure strict procedural safeguards. The African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights has also repeatedly called on African States to establish moratoria on executions with a view to abolition.[xvi]
Nigeria therefore occupies an interesting legal position. The death penalty remains lawful under Nigerian domestic law, but its application is surrounded by constitutional, judicial and international safeguards. The debate is consequently not simply whether Nigeria permits capital punishment, but whether every stage leading to its possible implementation satisfies the strict requirements of law and due process.
For the four persons recently sentenced to death in Edo State, these safeguards remain particularly significant. Their case illustrates why a death sentence must be viewed not as the immediate end of a convict’s legal journey, but as the beginning of a process in which constitutional rights, appellate remedies and executive powers continue to operate.
WHAT HAPPENS TO THE EDO CONVICTS NOW?
The recent Edo judgment provides a practical illustration of the legal journey discussed above. On 29 September 2026, the Edo State Special Criminal Court sentenced Marvellous Isaac, Wisdom Michael, Rufus Emete Michael and Gift Raphael to death on various counts arising from kidnapping and related offences. The court ordered that the sentences be carried out by hanging or lethal injection.[xvii]
However, the judgment does not mean that the four convicts will immediately be taken to the place of execution. Their constitutional right to appeal remains relevant. Counsel to the fourth convict, Gift Raphael, has already indicated that she will appeal the judgment. A Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Olayiwola Afolabi, has also publicly cautioned the Edo State Government against taking steps towards execution before the convicts have had the opportunity to exercise their right of appeal.
This is where the distinction between a death sentence and an execution becomes particularly important. The court has pronounced the sentence, but the law still provides a period within which the convicts may challenge the judgment. If an appeal is filed, the appellate courts will have the opportunity to examine the decision before any question of execution can properly arise.
The case therefore demonstrates why the phrase “sentenced to death” should not automatically be understood as “about to be executed.” The four convicts have entered another stage of the criminal justice process—one involving their appellate rights and the further statutory and constitutional procedures governing the implementation of a death sentence.
Ultimately, what happens to them will depend on the outcome of the appellate process and the operation of the applicable law thereafter. The judge has pronounced the sentence, but the law has not yet finished speaking.
RECOMMENDATIONS
The recent Edo judgment highlights the need for greater clarity and consistency in the administration of Nigeria’s death penalty. While capital punishment remains lawful, the process surrounding its implementation should continue to protect the constitutional rights of persons sentenced to death.
First, appellate safeguards should be strictly protected. No person sentenced to death should be executed while a competent appeal remains pending. Courts and correctional authorities should ensure that convicted persons are adequately informed of their right to appeal and have reasonable access to legal representation.
Second, the procedure for implementing death sentences should be made clearer. The relevant authorities should ensure strict compliance with the statutory requirements governing death warrants, custody and execution. This would reduce uncertainty between the pronouncement of a death sentence and its eventual implementation.
Third, legal aid should be strengthened for persons facing capital punishment. Because the consequences of a wrongful conviction in a capital case are irreversible, indigent defendants should have meaningful access to competent legal representation from trial through the appellate process.
Finally, Nigeria should continue to review its approach to capital punishment. The continued imposition of death sentences alongside the prolonged existence of a large death-row population raises important questions about the effectiveness, purpose and practical operation of the system. Any future reform should be informed by constitutional requirements, judicial experience, public safety considerations and Nigeria’s human-rights obligations.
The objective should not merely be to determine whether a person can be sentenced to death, but to ensure that every stage of the process from conviction to appeal and, where applicable, execution is governed by law, fairness and due process.
CONCLUSION
The recent Edo State judgment has brought renewed attention to Nigeria’s continued use of the death penalty. However, a sentence of death does not mean that execution automatically follows. The convict may still exercise the right of appeal, while the law prescribes further procedures before the sentence can be carried out.
The case therefore demonstrates the important distinction between being sentenced to death and actually being executed. In a punishment that is irreversible, strict compliance with constitutional and legal safeguards remains essential.
Ultimately, the judge may pronounce the sentence, but the law determines
[i] Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999, s 241(1)(e).
[ii] Criminal Procedural Act, Cap C41, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria 2004, s 368(1).
[iii] Criminal Procedural Act, s 370.
[iv] Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999, s 212.
[v] ibid s 175.
[vi] ibid s 212(1).
[vii] ibid s 212(1)(a)–(d).
[viii] ibid s 175(1)(a)–(d).
[ix] ibid s 175(2).
[x] ibid s 241(1)(e).
[xi] Bello & Ors v Attorney-General, Oyo State (1986) 5 NWLR (Pt 45) 828
[xii] Joseph Kanjo, ‘Edo court sentences four to death over kidnapping, cultism’ The Guardian (30 September 2026), reporting legal commentary on the convicts’ right of appeal and the need to allow the applicable period for appeal to run.
[xiii] Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999, s 33(1).
[xiv] ibid s 36.
[xv] African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights (Ratification and Enforcement) Act, Cap A9, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria 2004, arts 4 and 5.
[xvi] African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights, Resolution 42(XXVI) 99 on the Moratorium on the Death Penalty (15 November 1999); see also European Union Agency for Asylum, ‘Death penalty’ in Nigeria: Country Focus (January 2026), noting the African Commission’s calls for a moratorium on executions.
[xvii] Edo court sentences four to death for kidnapping, cult membership’, Premium Times (29 September 2026).
Oluwaleye Adedoyin Grace, LLB. (Hons.) Oluwaleyeadedoyingrace2001@gmail.com or 08106289069
[A MUST HAVE] Evidence Act Demystified With Recent And Contemporary Cases And Materials
Available now for NGN 40,000 at ASC Publications, 10, Boyle Street, Onikan, Lagos. Beside High Court, TBS. Email publications@ayindesanni.com or WhatsApp +2347056667384. Purchase Link: https://paystack.com/buy/evidence-act-complete-annotation
______________________________________________________________________ “Enhance Legal Practice With Authoritative Reports” — Alexander Payne Offers Comprehensive Law Reports, Spanning Over A Century Of Nigerian Jurisprudence
Interested buyers are encouraged to place their orders and enquiries via:
0704 444 4777, 0704 444 4999, 0818 199 9888
Website: www.alexandernigeria.com
