The Lagos State Government has urged the Supreme Court to overturn the judgment of the Court of Appeal that discharged and acquitted 58-year-old medical director Dr Olufemi Olaleye of the offence of defiling his wife’s niece.
Justice Rahman Oshodi of the Lagos State Special Offences and Domestic Violence Court had on October 24, 2023, found Olaleye guilty of the two-count charge of defilement of a child and sexual assault by penetration brought against him by the Lagos State government.
The judge stated that the defendant’s confessional statement, made before his lawyer, Olalekan Buruji, and the DPO of Anthony Police Station, that he regretted his act, proved that he committed the offences.
However, in November 2024, the Court of Appeal acquitted Olaleye, citing errors in the lower court’s judgment. The appellate court found the prosecution’s evidence to be “tainted” and “unreliable,” which led to overturning his conviction.
In Justice Jimi Olukayode Bada’s verdict, the appellate court identified numerous material contradictions in the prosecution’s evidence that the lower court should not have relied upon.
Justice Bada also criticised aspects of the testimony from a child forensic specialist, a medical doctor from the Mirabel Centre, and the investigating officer, deeming their evidence “worthless.”
The court further held that the trial judge compromised the integrity of the proceedings by attempting to fill what it termed “the yawning gaps” in the prosecution’s case.
The Court of Appeal also questioned why the prosecution did not present important witnesses, including two family members who supposedly heard the appellant’s alleged confession.
However, in a notice of appeal dated December 27, 2024, the Lagos State government filed an appeal before the Supreme Court, seeking to reverse the Court of Appeal’s acquittal of Olaleye.
The state’s grounds for appeal include the argument that the appellate court erred in disregarding Section 209(2) of the Evidence Act, 2011 and the Supreme Court decision in Dagaya and State (2006).
The state also contended that the sworn evidence of a child above the age of fourteen requires corroboration, as specified by Section 209(3) of the Evidence Act, 2011, which states that the evidence of a child under 14 needs corroboration to secure a conviction.
The state is seeking the following reliefs: an order allowing the appeal and setting aside the judgment of the Court of Appeal delivered on November 29, 2024.
“An order affirming the conviction and sentences imposed on Olaleye by the trial court in Charge No. ID/20289C/2022.
