Defence in criminal trials: All you need to know.

Defence in criminal trials: All you need to know.

1. Introduction 

Following the closure of the prosecution case at a subordinate court, under Section 231 of the CPA, if the court finds that a sufficient case has been made against the accused, it will inform the accused of the charges and their rights. The court then calls upon the accused to present a defence unless they choose not to exercise any of those rights. In the High Court, the accused or their advocate may begin by stating the facts or legal grounds they intend to rely upon, and may also comment on the prosecution’s evidence, as provided by Section 294 of the CPA. The accused can then give evidence on their own behalf, with their advocate examining any witnesses, after which the defence may close its case. Judges and magistrates do not have the authority to close a defence case; it is up to the defence to close its case when they believe the evidence presented is sufficient. Although the accused has no obligation to prove their innocence, they are generally expected to establish the main theme of their defence to ensure a fair trial.

2. Lies of an Accused Person in Defence 

Lies by the accused may corroborate the prosecution’s case, but cannot independently form the basis for conviction. However, if the lies are relevant, they may contribute to the court’s assessment of guilt. Lies may sometimes stem from a legitimate reason, shame, or the desire to conceal dishonorable behavior, but to serve as corroboration, they must be directly relevant to the case.

2.1 Co-Accused Evidence 

When an accused person gives evidence, that evidence may be considered against a co-accused, similar to any other piece of evidence. Evidence inconsistent with that of a co-accused can be as harmful to the co-accused's case as evidence that directly implicates them.

2.2 Defence Advancing Prosecution Case 

If, in their defence, the accused provides evidence that strengthens the prosecution's case, the court is entitled to consider this evidence in deciding the accused’s guilt.

3. Possible Defences 

Accused persons may present various defences during trial, such as:

3.1 Defence of Alibi 

An alibi, meaning “elsewhere” or “at another place,” is when the accused claims they were not present at the location of the crime. A legitimate alibi should be disclosed to the investigating police or prosecution prior to trial, allowing verification. An alibi introduced for the first time during trial may appear less genuine. The legal basis for an alibi is found in Section 194 of the CPA and Section 42 of the EOCA.

3.2 Proof of Alibi 

The accused typically needs to prove an alibi on a balance of probabilities. If an individual charged with a serious crime asserts they were elsewhere and fails to provide evidence, the court may assign little credibility to the claim. Section 194(4) of the CPA mandates that an alibi notice be sufficiently detailed for the prosecution to verify, and it should be given before the main hearing. If notice is absent, the court may decide not to consider it.

3.3 Defence of Insanity 

According to Section 12 of the Penal Code, all individuals are presumed sane unless proven otherwise. However, under Section 13, a person who, due to mental illness, cannot comprehend their actions or lacks control over them, may not be criminally responsible. Insanity can serve as a defence if it shows that the accused lacked the mental capacity required for criminal culpability. The provisions addressing insanity—Sections 216, 219, and 220 of the CPA—apply in three distinct scenarios: when the court deems a mental examination necessary (Section 220(1)); when the accused cannot follow trial proceedings (Sections 216-218); and when insanity is used as a defence based on the accused’s state of mind at the time of the alleged crime (Section 219).

3.4 Defence of Intoxication 

Per Section 14(2)(a) and (b) of the CPA, intoxication can serve as a defence if the accused, due to intoxication caused without their consent or resulting in temporary or permanent insanity, was unaware of their actions.

3.5 Defence of Person or Property 

Self-defence is permitted under Section 18 of the Penal Code. To invoke this defence, the accused must demonstrate, on a balance of probability, that they acted in good faith to protect their life or limb. The force used must be reasonable; excessive force resulting in death can lead to a manslaughter conviction.

3.6 Defence of Provocation to Murder Under Section 202 of the Penal Code, certain criteria must be met for an act, insult, or conduct to qualify as provocation, including wrongful conduct directed at the accused or someone close to them, among other factors. When proven, provocation may reduce a murder charge to manslaughter per Section 201.