Murder: Supreme Court affirms Naval officer’s life imprisonment, dismissal


scale_of_justiceA dismissed naval officer, Felix Olanrewaju Odunlami, had a bad day with the Supreme Court on Friday.

The apex court affirmed the sentences of life imprisonment and dismissal handed to him by the Court of Appeal and General Court Martial.

He was accused of killing a commercial motorcyclist in Lagos.

Justice Bode Rhodes-Vivour, in a lead judgement, upheld the decisions of the General Court Martial and the Court of Appeal, Lagos.

Lieutenant Odulami (with force number: NN2121) was going from the Lagos State Secretariat, Alausa, Ikeja to Apapa on July 25, 2005 when, at the Allen Roundabout, Ikeja, a commercial motorcyclist, Peter Edeh, hit the naval officer’s car from behind.

When the cyclist realised that the owner of the car was a military personnel, Edeh was said to have knelt down to beg Odunlami for forgiveness.

But a visibly angry Odunlami ignored Edeh’s plea, took his pistol and shot Edeh in the mouth. He died instantly.

Shortly after Edeh was shot, passers-by attacked him, burnt his car and almost lynched him, before he was rescued by the police.

He was arraigned on January 27, 2006 before a General Court Martial on a three-count charge.

He was charged with manslaughter, loss of service item (for not being able to convincingly account for four rounds of 9mm live ammunition) and conduct to the prejudice of service discipline.

His offences were said to be contrary and punishable under sections 68(1)(a), 103(i) AFA 105 and 106 of the Armed Forces Act Cap A 20 laws of Nigeria.

At the conclusion of his trial in July of that year, the Court Martial convicted him on counts one and two.

The court sentenced him to life imprisonment for manslaughter and dismissed him from service on count two.

He approached the Court of Appeal, Lagos to upturn the decision but the court upheld the decision of the General Court Martial.

Not satisfied with the appellate court decision, Odunlami, again, appealed to the apex court.

In upholding the decisions of both lower courts, the apex court held that the appellant’s defence of provocation could not avail him because of the facts of the case.

The court also held that the trial court could not exercise its discretion to give a lower sentence because under Section 105 of the Armed Forces Act, (under which he was charged) “the trial judge has no discretion, but to sentence the appellant to life imprisonment.

“The confirming authority confirmed the sentence of life imprisonment and dismissal from service of the Nigerian Navy. It further stripped the appellant of his rank and directed that he was not entitled to his financial entitlements.

“Was this sentence excessive? Dismissal means rejection, discarding. Once an officer is sentenced to life imprisonment and dismissed from services of the Armed Forces, it would be naïve of him to expect to be entitled to his entitlements. Dismissal and forfeiture of entitlement go together.

“The well laid down position of the law is that this court will not interfere with concurrent findings of the courts below, except where the findings are perverse or not supported by credible evidence, or where miscarriage of justice has occurred.

“The Court Martial did not believe the appellant’s narration of events, and I agree with both courts below that the appellant’s narration of events was wrong.

“The mob that descended on the appellant was attracted to the scene when the appellant shot the deceased. The appeal has no merit. It is hereby dismissed,” Justice Rhodes-Vivour held.



Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.