‘ACJA’s provisions on bail allow for unlimited applications before trial courts’

Provisions of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA) on bail do not put a limit on the number of times a defendant can apply for bail before a trial court, human rights lawyer, Hameed Ajibola Jimoh said.

Jimoh said Section 158 of ACJA said the provisions of sections 35(3,4&5) and 6(6a) confer the right to bail on a defendant as a right not a privilege generally, except in a case of capital offence charge.

However, he added that ACJA provided for exceptional circumstances where bail could even be granted in capital offences.

He said where a bail is refused by a court, especially a high court, the same application can still be brought as many times as possible depending on the circumstances necessitating such applications.

“Section 161(1&2) of ACJA talks about exceptional circumstances which shall be at the court’s discretion, especially in capital offence charges. These exceptional circumstances shall be a ground for further bail application to the same court in the same criminal trial after one or two or more failed attempts,” he said.

Jimoh said this provision can be utilised along with Section 6(6a) of the Constitution by a defendant whether the trial is on a capital offence charge or not.

He said, “One of those circumstances listed in Section 162(2a&b) is ill health, which in my view, might and can occur at any time, more so, it’s only a living person that can be put to trial.

“The other circumstance is extraordinary delay in the investigation, arraignment and prosecution for a period exceeding one year. In other words, where a trial continues for more than a year even, a day beyond a year, further application may be brought by the defendant for the court to release him on bail relying on this provision of ACJA, even in a capital offence case.

“The last circumstance is left at the discretion and consideration of the judge, in the particular facts of the case, considering any other exceptional circumstance that might be made as a ground for bringing the application by the defendant. So, in summary, the ground upon which further applications for bail for a limitless occasions may be made is exceptional circumstances surrounding the particular facts of the case.”

On whether appeal should be made where a bail application is refused at a trial court rather than reapplying before the same court, Jimoh said sometimes appeal might not be a better option on such refusal.

He said, “Some of the reasons in my consideration are: (1) The cost of appealing. More so, many criminal trials are handled pro bono. The defence counsel or the defendant himself or his relative might be poor to afford the cost. (2) Appeal might defeat the aim by a long period of time before the appeal is heard and judgment delivered. So, I am of the firm submission that re-applying in exceptional circumstances might just be apt. More so, what the appellate court might consider might be the reason for the refusal by the trial court and whether there is any exceptional circumstance for the appellate court to grant same.”

He said it is not true that reapplying for bail could delay trial because a court could take the bail application on the trial day and continue the trial or adjourn the application to another day but allow the trial to continue.

“Where an application for bail is made, it is not saying that the trial should be stayed but that the defendant be granted a temporary release (bail) while his trial continues. So, it does not affect the speed of the trial,” he added.