Benin Journal of Public Law , Volume 10, 2024

The offence of murder as provided under the Criminal Code is indeed one of the most heinous of the classes of mala inse offences. The punishment for murder which is death by hanging is still one of the few offences attracting such maximum punishment1. The practical implication of the extreme nature of the offence coupled with its punishment is that it places a very high burden of proof on the prosecution, in order to secure a conviction. However, this burden of proof is so high that in most cases little errors in the discharge of this burden may result in the accused persons being acquitted of the offence or of being convicted of the lesser offence of Manslaughter2. The difficult burden of proof has in some cases led to the reluctance of the appropriate authorities to even initiate prosecution for this offence3. The fallout of this is that in some murder cases; the victim may go without a remedy unless the burden of proof is relaxed. One possible medium of relaxation is in the use of dying declarations3a

Despite women’s movement over the past several decades into some sectors of the labor force traditionally occupied by men, the overwhelming majority of Nigerian women remain in traditionally female occupations. Most Nigerian women in the village and city markets, as the case may be, engage in buying and selling a limited range of goods and foodstuff. Women have found themselves increasingly in administrative support services such as clerical officers, typists, secretaries and what have you. Others prepare and sell food, or depending on the prevailing agricultural system work on their own farms or assists their husbands in farm work. Such activities always complement the incomes of the families. Sometimes as claims for negligent deaths involving women show – the women can be considered as the major breadwinners of their families. A husband whose income as a laborer was far outstripped by the income of the wife through her trading activity was able to successfully claim that he was a dependent of the late wife and was entitled to a share of the damages that other dependents claimed.