The Validity of the Application of Ignorance of the Law as no Defense in Nigeria

Need help with Legal Matters?

Get free legal advice

Contact us to get the best legal advice for your legal matters today from the top lawyers in Nigeria

Table of Contents

The Validity of the Application of Ignorance of the Law as no Defense in Nigeria
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
WhatsApp

The Validity of the Application of Ignorance of the Law as no Defense in Nigeria

Introduction

The Latin maxim “ignorantia juris non excusat” translates to “ignorance of the law is no excuse.” It is a foundational principle in many legal systems worldwide, including Nigeria. The doctrine presumes that every individual within a jurisdiction is aware of the laws governing their conduct and thus cannot use lack of knowledge as a valid excuse for violating the law.

But how fair is this assumption in a country as complex as Nigeria—multi-ethnic, multi-lingual, with a dual legal system comprising statutory, customary, and Islamic laws? This article explores the validity, limitations, and practical application of the doctrine in Nigeria. It also discusses its impact on justice, legal awareness, and modern jurisprudence.


Understanding the Doctrine: “Ignorance of the Law is No Defense”

This doctrine serves a key function in legal administration—it prevents individuals from escaping liability by claiming they were unaware of the law. It ensures uniform accountability and simplifies law enforcement.

Types of Ignorance

  1. Ignorance of the law (Ignorantia juris): Not knowing that a particular act is prohibited by law.

  2. Ignorance of fact (Ignorantia facti): Not knowing certain facts that affect the application of the law.

Only ignorance of fact may sometimes be accepted as a defense under Nigerian law.


Legal Foundation of the Doctrine in Nigeria

1. The Nigerian Constitution (1999, as amended)

Though the Constitution doesn’t expressly mention this maxim, it is implied in the rule of law and equal application of the law to all citizens.

2. Criminal Code (Southern Nigeria) and Penal Code (Northern Nigeria)

These codes uphold that all persons are deemed to know the law, especially in criminal liability. For example:

  • Section 24 of the Criminal Code: “A person is not criminally responsible for an act or omission which occurs independently of the exercise of his will… but is responsible for the consequences of his acts, whether he knew them to be unlawful or not.”

3. Case Law Authority

Courts in Nigeria have consistently upheld the maxim in numerous judgments.

Case: Okonkwo v. The State (1988) 1 NWLR (Pt. 69) 172

The Supreme Court emphasized that ignorance of a criminal law is not a defense to criminal liability.


Why the Doctrine Is Important

1. Encourages Legal Certainty

If ignorance were accepted as a defense, the legal system would collapse under the burden of unverifiable claims.

2. Promotes Law and Order

It holds every citizen accountable for their actions, deterring impunity and irresponsibility.

3. Reduces Judicial Burden

Allows for straightforward application of laws, especially in criminal cases.


Application in Criminal Law

In Nigeria, ignorance of criminal law is never an excuse. Whether the crime is as serious as murder or as technical as a tax offense, once it is proved that the accused committed the act, they cannot argue they were unaware it was a crime.

Example:

If someone is caught trafficking drugs and claims they didn’t know it was prohibited, the court will still convict them.


Application in Civil Law

While stricter in criminal law, the doctrine is slightly more flexible in civil matters.

  • In civil law, ignorance of certain procedures may allow remedies like extension of time, but not total exemption from liability.

  • For instance, if a person fails to register a land transaction and later claims ignorance of the need to register, the court may not reverse the effect of non-registration.


Limitations and Exceptions to the Rule

Though the doctrine is strict, Nigerian law does make exceptions or mitigating considerations in some contexts.

1. Ignorance of Fact is a Valid Defense

If someone acts under a mistaken belief of fact, they may not be liable.

Example:

A person kills another in self-defense, genuinely believing the other person was armed. If later it’s discovered that the person wasn’t armed, the defendant may still be protected under the law due to ignorance of fact.

2. Mistake of Law Induced by Authorities

If a person acts on official advice that turns out to be incorrect, courts may consider it.

Case Example:

If a government officer assures a business owner that they do not need a license to operate, and they are later prosecuted, the court may be lenient.

3. Illiteracy and Legal Complexity

Courts may exercise judicial discretion in sentencing or liability where it’s clear that:

  • The law in question is unduly complex

  • The individual is extremely disadvantaged, e.g., elderly, illiterate, mentally impaired

Though it doesn’t absolve the person, it may affect sentencing or administrative discretion.


Challenges in Applying the Doctrine in Nigeria

1. Lack of Public Legal Awareness

Many citizens are genuinely unaware of new laws or amendments. Rural dwellers may not even know about existing laws due to:

  • Language barriers

  • Illiteracy

  • Lack of internet or media access

2. Complexity of Nigerian Legal System

  • Nigeria has three legal systems: Statutory, Customary, and Sharia.

  • A person in one state may commit an offense unknowingly if they travel to another state with different laws.

3. Lack of Government Sensitization

The government often fails to:

  • Publish new laws widely

  • Translate laws into local languages

  • Use radio, television, and social platforms to educate the masses


Implications for Justice and Fairness

The strict application of the doctrine may lead to unfair outcomes, especially for:

  • Poor, illiterate defendants

  • First-time offenders

  • People from marginalized communities

There’s a growing call for a more compassionate and contextual approach, without undermining the rule of law.


Judicial Attitudes and Interpretation

Nigerian courts have generally upheld the principle but sometimes use discretion to temper its effect.

In Gani Fawehinmi v. Inspector General of Police (2002) 7 NWLR (Pt. 767) 606,

the court reaffirmed the principle but emphasized that legal practitioners and public institutions have a duty to ensure citizens understand their rights and obligations.


Comparative Analysis: How Other Countries Apply the Rule

United States

  • The rule applies strictly.

  • However, in Cheek v. United States, the Supreme Court held that a genuine misunderstanding of a complex tax law could be a defense in limited cases.

United Kingdom

  • Generally upholds the doctrine.

  • However, courts have shown flexibility when laws are unclear or not publicly disseminated.

Nigeria can draw lessons from these jurisdictions by:

  • Balancing accountability with education

  • Ensuring laws are accessible and understandable


Recommendations for Nigeria

1. Legal Awareness Campaigns

Government must:

  • Use national orientation programs

  • Partner with civil society to educate citizens

  • Broadcast new laws in simple terms and local languages

2. Law Simplification and Translation

Laws should be:

  • Written in simple English

  • Translated into major Nigerian languages (Yoruba, Igbo, Hausa, etc.)

  • Made available online and in physical formats

3. Community Legal Services

  • Establish more Legal Aid offices

  • Provide free legal clinics in rural areas

  • Empower traditional rulers with basic legal training

4. Review of Harsh Penalties

Lawmakers should consider graduated penalties for first-time offenders who can prove ignorance or lack of access to legal education.

5. Develop Judicial Guidelines

Courts can adopt sentencing guidelines that allow flexibility in applying the doctrine, especially for:

  • Vulnerable groups

  • Non-violent offenses

  • Procedural defaults


Conclusion

“Ignorance of the law is no defense” is a core legal principle that supports justice, deterrence, and administrative order. However, in Nigeria’s complex and evolving legal landscape, blind and mechanical application of the doctrine can result in injustice.

While the rule remains valid and necessary, its future in Nigerian law must be shaped by a commitment to accessibility, education, and fairness. The government, legal professionals, civil society, and media must work together to ensure that laws are not only made—but understood.

Contact Us

At Chaman Law Firm, we are committed to bridging the legal awareness gap in Nigeria. Through education, community legal services, and transparent advisory, we help individuals and organizations understand and comply with the law.


Let us walk you through it—your rights, your duties, and how to protect your interests.

📞Phone:  08065553671, 08096888818

Email: chamanlawfirm@gmail.com

📍 Address: 115, Obafemi Awolowo Way, Allen Junction, Ikeja, Lagos, Nigeria

🌍Click here to learn more about Chaman Law Firm

Your Right, We Protect.


To Top