Court: Dear Mr. Man, please rise, “After listening to the argument of the prosecution, their witnesses and examining the exhibits tendered in evidence and juxtaposing same with the arguments of your own counsel and evidence, this court is convinced beyond reasonable doubt that you are guilty of the crimes as charged. Do you have anything to say before we sentence you?
Man: “Please sir, temper justice with mercy” “I am a father of twelve children, my first child has just gained admission into the university, my wife is in the hospital, I am the bread winner of the family, the only one who works to ensure that the family is afloat. Sir, I stole just a meager amount of money, just ₦5,000. If you send me to jail sir, you will be destroying the lives of my children as there will be no one to take care of them. I beg of you sir, please save me, help me plleeeaaaassssseeeeee.
This is what is called an allocutus, it is commonly evident in criminal trials and it comes immediately after the court has reached its verdict; always a guilty verdict and before sentencing. The Blacks Law Dictionary has defined it as the “formality of court’s inquiry of prisoner as to whether he has any legal cause to show why judgment should not be pronounced against him on verdict of conviction.”
In SAHABI UMARU TSALIBAWA v. HAJIYA HABIBA [1991] 2 NWLR (Pt. 174) 461. C.A, OKUNOLA, J.C.A. while considering the role of the judex held that “In the process of making the findings, adequate consideration must be given to the defence. The Judge then considers the state of law and if the findings of facts made in law prove all the elements of the offence beyond reasonable doubt, the Judge then gives his verdict of guilty of the offence charged. He proceeds to consider and pronounce sentence after giving the convicted prisoner an opportunity to make his allocutus. The community reading of section 247 Criminal Procedure Act and section 197 (1) Criminal Procedure Code is apposite in this regard.
Thus, an allocutus is simply the opportunity given to the accused person to state the reasons why the full punishment as prescribed by law should not be meted on him for the crime he has committed. Why should his sentence be mitigated? Why should he be shown mercy?
Though the accused is at the discretion of the judge, but it is well known that as the judges are also human, and usually have the milk of kindness flowing in their veins, they are likely to be swayed by the pathetic, emotion – laden, tears producing, and heart – shattering submissions of the accused or his counsel.
We all know that after the creation of man and especially after mankind was sent out from the Garden of Eden, he forfeited his divine heritage which can only be regained by faith in Jesus Christ. The Bible is very explicit about the fact that only those who believe in Jesus will be saved. John 3:16 provides that “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. This implies that those who refuse to give their life to Christ will face eternal damnation.
At this junction, and as budding law students, it is tempting to take a foray into what the criminal trial at heaven may look like for humankind because judgment day is as inevitable as rapture day. Moreso, in Hebrews 9:27, we are told that “And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment (KJV), “Everyone has to die once, then face the consequences (MSG)”.
Just like a normal courtroom, the Devil will be there as the Accuser of the Brethren, Jesus Christ as the Defence Counsel and God as the Chief Judge. Of course, all the saints and the hosts of heaven will be there to witness the trial, while you and I will be lined up as accused, but mind you, there won’t be anything like co-accused, as everyman will be there to give his OWN account.
It is instructive to note that all repentant sinners will be discharge and acquitted, but what happens to the unrepentant ones, will they be vindicated on the strength of their advocacy? Will they be able to argue and wriggle their way out? Nay, they will be sentenced.
Some may attempt to raise the plea of being a first offender, what is the effect of this; will it mitigate the punishment of hell? At this point, will the Most High Judge give a ruling of “go and sin no more” I think He will not. The fact that you have been a saint for over 70 years or you gave your life to Christ in 1890 or 19Moses and just gave in to the spirit of anger, unknowingly some minutes to your death will not afford you a saving grace.
Now let’s consider something else, what of the weight of the sin committed, should a man who stole a goat be sentenced to hell just like a man who killed another man? Even in Nigeria Criminal Jurisprudence, a careful perusal of the Criminal Code and the Penal Code revealed that there are diverse punishments for different offences. While Section 358 of the Criminal Code provides life imprisonment as the punishment for rape, Section 360 of the same code only provides two years imprisonment for anyone who unlawfully and indecently assaults a female. But this is not synonymous with heavenly position of things, a sin is a sin, there is no little sin, you may wish to watch the Mount Zion movie, Just A Little Sin, for better elucidation. Rom 6:23 attest that the wages of sin is death. Hence, anyone who commits any sin, no matter how small or weightless the sin may appear will still obtain the same punishment: the sulphuric burning palace of hell.
Another factor is the time of the offence, shouldn’t an 80 year old woman be spared the punishment for a sin she committed in her twenties? Shouldn’t there be a defence like, ‘I was just a child then”? I opine that from the moment one knows his right from his left, he will be held responsible for all his intentions, actions and even inactions.
There is a latin maxim that posits that ignorantia facti excussat, ignorantia juris non excussat meaning “ignorance of fact excuses, ignorance of the law does not excuse”. Is it a fact or a law that something is a sin or not? If it is a fact, the defence of ignorance may apply and one may claim that because he is not aware of that, he should be excused the punishment. However, that a particular act or thing is a sin or not is not a fact but a law. It is a spiritual law. The tablets given to Moses in Exodus, particularly in Chapter 20 contains statement of the law as there are “Thou shall nots” contained therein. We need no reference to judicial authorities before we know that the word “shall” denotes compulsion and mandatories.
Normally, anchoring gives the judge the discretion not to give the accused the maximum number of years prescribed for that crime. However, in heaven there is no such thing. No amount of advocacy will sway the Judge of Heaven and Earth and just as Justice Sowemimo replied in the locus classicus case of Awolowo v State ()that “my hands are tied”, and because God honours his word more than himself and he is not a man that he should lie, none of his word will go without being fulfilled. The bible will be fulfilled.
After judgment comes punishment, there is no room for excuse, and there is no place to seek for mercy after judgment. Sentencing is immediate; it’s either “enter into the joy of your Lord, or depart from me, you worker of iniquity. Romans 2:5 – 11, 16. May we hear the former. Amen.
Also available on page 28 of the “Learned Tongue” an annual magazine of Christian Law Students’ Fellowship of Nigeria (CLASFON) University of Ilorin Chapter.
Channels 