By Samuel Adesheila

The offence of rape is provided for under Section 357 of the Criminal Code, and the said section defines it thus:

Any person who has unlawful carnal knowledge of a woman or girl, without her consent, or with her consent, if the consent is obtained by force or by means of threats or intimidation of any kind, or by fear of harm, or by means of false and fraudulent representation as to the nature of the act, or, in the case of a married woman, by personating her husband, is guilty of an offence which is called rape.

After defining the offence, the law by the provisions of Section 358 stipulates the punishment for any one found guilty of rape, the said section provides thus:

Any person who commits the offence of rape is liable to imprisonment for life, with or without canning.

Rape in the legal parlance means a forcible sexual intercourse with a girl or a woman without her giving consent to it. The most important and essential ingredient of the offence is penetration, see the case of Iko v. State (2001) FWLR (Pt. 68) 1161, (2001) 14 NWLR (Pt. 732) 221, (2001) 7 SCNJ 382.

Rape is defined as the unlawful carnal knowledge of a woman or girl without her consent or with her consent if the consent is obtained by force or by means of threats or intimidation of any kind or by fear of harm, or by means of false and fraudulent representation as to the nature of the act is guilty of the offence of rape. Afor Lucky Vs The State (2016) LPELR – 40541 (SC)

By virtue of Sections 39(c) and 282(1) (e) of the Penal Code, a child under the age of 14 years is incapable of giving consent. Thus, once it is proved that the accused had sexual intercourse with a child under the age of 14 years, he is guilty of rape. Shuaibu Isa Vs Kano State (2016) LPELR – 40011 (SC). Consent in this context of rape must be devoid of any form of external influence, just like I said earlier that a child who is under age is not however capable of giving consent.

For an accused facing charge of rape, and the prosecution to succeed there are certain elements that must be established just like every other criminal offence (s), these elements are so essential that it is the breath of the offence itself and where it gives viable life to the charges, the accused will be convicted. The prosecution must be able to proof with credible evidence and beyond reasonable doubt .1. That the accused has sexual intercourse with the woman. 2. That the woman who is not the accused person’s wife, and was in any of the following circumstances (i) against her will; (ii) without her consent; (iii) with her consent, when her consent has been obtained by putting her in fear of death or of hurt; (iv) with her consent, when the man knows that he is not her husband and that her consent is given because she believes that he is another man to whom she is or believes herself to be lawfully married; (v) with or without her consent, when she is under fourteen years of age or of unsound mind, and .3. That there was penetration. The overlord of the element is Penetration, no matter how slight, is the most important and essential element of the offence. Iko Vs The State (supra)

The essential and most important ingredient of the offence of rape is penetration and unless penetration is proof, the prosecution cannot be said to have proved its case beyond reasonable doubt. Penetration however slight sufficient and it is not necessary to prove any injury or the rupture of the hymen to constitute the crime of rape. JOS N. A Police VS. Allah NA GANI (1968) NMCR 8; NATSAHA v. STATE (2017) LPELR-42359(SC).

To sustain the charge of rape, the prosecution must prove that the accused’s penis penetrated into the genitalia of the female person allegedly raped. That is the res in rem.

Though, corroboration is not essential to secure conviction in an offence of rape and the evidence of a sole witness, for example the prosecutrix whose evidence is cogent, strong and credible would suffice; nevertheless it is desirable that such evidence be corroborated in order to confirm in some material particulars, not only that the offence has been committed but that it was the accused who committed it. Iko v. State (supra).

During the trial for rape, evidence in corroboration must be independent testimony which affects the accused by connecting or tending to connect him with the rape. The evidence must implicate him, meaning not evidence which confirms in some material alone that the crime has been committed but also that the accused committed the crime. Iguh JSC in Iko Vs The State (supra) stated thus:

The corroboration need not consist of direct evidence that the accused person committed the offence, nor need it amount to a confirmation of the whole account given by a witness provided that it corroborates the evidence in some respects material to the charge in issue, and must go on to identify the accused with the crime in some material particular.

The apex court in the land when determining whether an accused person can be convicted on the uncorroborated evidence of the prosecution in a charge of rape in the case of MOHAMMED v. KANO STATE (2018) LPELR-43913(SC) held thus:

On the whole, it is my view that there was enough corroboration of the evidence of the prosecutrix to support the conviction of the appellant even as I agree that evidence of the prosecutrix alone, if it is cogent and reliable, can ground conviction in rape cases.

The burden of proving a charge against an accused person for rape is upon the prosecution. However, once the prosecution has adduced evidence which includes circumstantial evidence, which shows that the accused is guilty of the offence charged, the burden of proving that he is innocent shifts to the accused by virtue of Sections 138 (3), 139,141 and 143 of the Evidence Act.

By virtue of Section 178 (5) of the Evidence Act proof of the offence of rape under Section 282 (i) (e) of the Penal Code requires that the evidence of the prosecutrix must be corroborated. Such corroboration could either be by direct or circumstantial evidence provided it shows in some material particular not only that the offence was committed but that it was the accused who committed the offence. Sanni v. The State (1993) 4 NWLR (pt. 285) 99. In considering whether evidence is corroborative or not, the court must take the evidence as a whole and not piece by piece and suspicion cannot give such evidence the quality of corroboration. Sanni v. The state (1993) 4 NWLR (pt. 285) 99.

In an action for rape, it is eminently desirable that the evidence of the complainant should be strengthened by other evidence implicating the accused person in some material particular. It is however not a rule of law that an accused person in a charge of rape cannot be convicted on the uncorroborated evidence of the prosecutrix. Ogunbayo v. State (2007) 8 NWLR (pt. 1035) 157.

In criminal trial, corroboration of evidence is not required except where the law demands it. Evidence of corroboration of the evidence of the victim in a rape case is not required as a matter of law, but it is required in practice.

Rape is by nature grave, devastating, traumatic; it also reduces the totality of the victim’s personality. We must continue to educate the male folks about the trauma they put the female folks in when this satanic crime is committed on them, and we must speak out against rape in all institutions especially the religion bodies, our security forces must do well to swing into action when their attention is called upon in respect of this crime and not seek the avenue to make money from the victim’s relatives by asking for all forms of mobilization funds as they may tag it or in any guise.

Adedayo Samuel Adesheila.