You have no items in your shopping cart.
ABSTRACT
This study interrogates the defence of provocation to criminal liability in the Nigerian Criminal justice system. The law recognizes that humans are prone to losing their control under extreme rage causing a violent reaction, justice demands that account be taken of this natural tendency of theirs by inflicting punishment. The defence of provocation is available to an accused as a mitigating defence rather than an absolute one because much as the law recognizes human weakness, it does not condone human ferocity. It has given rise to many conceptual difficulties and no easy solution presents itself. This study examines some aspects of the plea of provocation in an attempt to put it in more rational basis reflecting the basic realities in the Nigerian society. This study adopts the doctrinal methodology using primary sources of material. Findings reveals that the defence of provocation is full of contradictions, pertaining to the reasonable man as a newly judicial creation and the proportion rule in retaliation, it is difficult to weigh and comprehend in practical situations. The study is of the strong opinion that the Law should be critical in giving any concession to human weakness, especially in cases of provocation. It is high time that the law set a high standard of self-control. This is to ensure that people do not hide under the guise of provocation to commit heinous crimes.
