The Supreme Court of Nigeria has come under intense public criticism following its decision to uphold the death sentence of Sunday Jackson, a Christian farmer from Adamawa State, for the killing of a Fulani herdsman, Ardo Bawuro, in what many legal experts and rights advocates describe as a clear act of self-defence.
The apex court, in a ruling delivered on March 7, 2025, affirmed the judgment of a lower court which sentenced Jackson to death by hanging for the incident that occurred over a decade ago during a confrontation on Jackson's farmland.
The verdict has sparked nationwide outrage, with constitutional lawyer and Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), Mike Ozekhome, leading calls for a reassessment of the ruling. Ozekhome argued that the judgment poses serious threats to the constitutional right of citizens to defend themselves against life-threatening attacks.
According to the SAN, the Supreme Court concluded that Jackson should have fled the scene after seizing a dagger from the herdsman, rather than using it to defend himself. “This reasoning,” Ozekhome said, “is detached from the reality of violent encounters and ignores the chaotic nature of physical struggles.”
He emphasized that Jackson acted instinctively in a life-or-death situation, stating, “The notion that a farmer in a rural setting, under physical attack, had the clear opportunity to escape after disarming his attacker is both speculative and a dangerous misinterpretation of self-defence principles.”
Ozekhome further decried a procedural violation in the Supreme Court's handling of the case, noting that the final ruling was delivered 167 days after arguments were concluded — exceeding the constitutionally mandated 90-day maximum period. He described this as a breach of due process that could invalidate the ruling on constitutional grounds.
The case has ignited a broader conversation on justice and insecurity in rural Nigeria, especially as farmers continue to face violent incursions by armed herdsmen. Civil society groups and human rights advocates have joined calls for the judgment to be reviewed, insisting that it sets a dangerous precedent for victims of aggression who are forced to act in self-defence.
As the debate grows, many Nigerians are demanding that the judiciary re-examines its stance on self-defence, particularly in cases involving marginalized rural dwellers whose lives and livelihoods are increasingly at risk.
.
