Reps move to extend timeframe for prosecution of sexual offences against minors

The house of representatives is considering extending the time limit for the prosecution of sexual offences against girls below 13 years of age.

The bill, which has passed the first reading, is sponsored by Bitrus Laori, a Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) lawmaker representing Demsa/Numan/Lamurde federal constituency of Adamawa state.

The bill proposes an amendment to sections 218 and 221 of the Criminal Code Act.

Section 218 of the extant law stipulates that: “Any person who has unlawful carnal knowledge of a girl under the age of thirteen years is guilty of a felony and is liable to imprisonment for life, with or without caning.

“Any person who attempts to have unlawful carnal knowledge of a girl under the age of thirteen years is guilty of a felony and is liable to imprisonment for fourteen years, with or without caning.

“A prosecution for either of the offences defined in this section of this Code shall be begun within two months after the offence is committed.

“A person cannot be convicted of either of the offences defined in this section of this Code upon the uncorroborated testimony of one witness.”

The bill seeks to amend the section by replacing the paragraph: “A prosecution for any of the offences defined in this section shall be commenced within two months after the offence is committed” with “A prosecution for any of the offences defined in this section shall be commenced within two years after the offence is committed”.

Laori said the two-month period stated in the law is insufficient to gather the necessary facts needed to prosecute an offender and is a “defence to free the offender of criminal responsibility even if it were true that the accused actually committed the offence”.

“The two-month period of limitation within which an offender of these offences has to be prosecuted provides a window of escape from prosecution and punishment of such offenders after two months,” he said.

“Many times where these offences are committed, reporting of the cases, arrest of the offender, investigation, collection and processing of evidence as well as commencement of trial take longer time than two months.

“This is usually influenced by many factors including threats, stigmatisation and absence of willing witnesses to testify for the prosecution.

“The two-month period provided by the law is, without doubt, too short to achieve this.

“The implication is that where the two-month period elapses, the offender is in law free of all criminal responsibility in that regard while the victim is denied justice and the effect of the offence on the victim remains.

“The removal of this time limit would put perpetrators in the know that there is no window of escape for them once they commit this offence and would operate to a great extent in deterring them and others from further committing the offences.”