Criminal Law II

Topic 2:Law of Conspiracy

DEP ARTM ENT O F P U BLI C LAW

FACU LTY OF LAW

U N I V E RS IT Y O F I B AD AN
The Law of Conspiracy
Provided for in Sections 516-518 of the Criminal Code
Conspiracy is not defined in law
Adejobi v. State SC 26 1 2008 per Bode Rhodes Vivour JSC “Conspiracy is
usually inferred , and it hardly even needs independent evidence. The offence
of conspiracy is complete when two or more persons agree to do an unlawful
act or to do a lawful act by unlawful means.”
See also, Okosun and Ors v. AG Bendel State Vol 16 NSCC Pt. 111 1327 ;
Njovens v. State (1998) ACLR 264; Sodiya v. State (2011) AA FWLR (Pt 560)
1357
The Law of Conspiracy Contd.
It is an inchoate offence- the crime need not have occurred for liability to
attach
The law treats the act of agreeing to commit a crime as a distinct offence
from the crime itself
An agreement between at least two people to commit a crime (a
confederacy) - ; Njovens v. State (1998) ACLR 264
Where the evidence on record does not reveal any agreement, the charge of
conspiracy cannot be made- Oladejo v. State (1994)6NWLR (Pt. 348)101 @
127
A defendant can be charged with both conspiracy to commit a crime and the
crime that was committed
Varies in nature and participation
That all who have active participation are accountable
 Conspiracy
When does “just talk” turn into a concrete enough
plan to become punishable?
How far does a plot have to go before it turns into a
“conspiracy”?
Usually inferred and hardly ever needs independent
evidence
It is complete when two or more persons agree to
do an unlawful act or to do a lawful act through
unlawful means
Concluded acts can be inferred by what each
person does or does not do in furtherance of the
conspiracy
It is immaterial that the persons had not met each
other
Njovens & ors v. The State (1973) 5 SC 17; Erin v.
State (1994) 5 NWLR (Pt. 346) 522; Salawu v. State
(2011) All FWLR (Pt 594) 35
Why Punish Conspiracy?
Designed to deter potential criminals from becoming
organized
Ensure that all those who had active parts in the criminal
activity are held accountable
The law treats the act of agreeing to commit a crime as a
distinct evil from the crime itself –Balogun v. AG Ogun
State (2002)2 SCNJ 196 at 209
Types of Conspiracy
Bilateral Approach Unilateral Approach
Also known as the ‘rule of consistency Utilized in the American Model Code
There must be two guilty minds Only one person needs to have a guilty mind
Without an agreement, there can be no conspiracy A person can be guilty of conspiracy even if the other
party is, for instance, an undercover police officer or is
Both parties must sincerely agree to commit the crime a party that had no intention of carrying out the
criminal actions contemplated
If one co-conspirator is acquitted, then the other co-
conspirator cannot be guilty of conspiracy
However, it only applies when two alleged co- Which do we have in Nigeria?
conspirators are tried for the same crime in the same
trial for the same conspiracy. If one is acquitted, In Nigeria, it is generally accepted that at least two
perforce, the other must be acquitted as well, because people are need to form a conspiracy, but there is no
a conspiracy requires at least two guilty participants consensus as to whether both parties must have guilty
minds
 Elements of Conspiracy
1. An agreement – extremely important for a successful conviction of conspiracy. There must be a concurrence
and a combination. The agreement does not need to be formal or indepth and it can be inferred from the
circumstances of the case
Olusola Oyeleye &anor v. The State (2013) LPELR 20693 CA USMAN KAZA V. THE STATE 2008 7 N.W.L.R (Part 1085) 125
S.C.; Okunde Kolawole v. The State LER (2015) SC 82/2012; Chianagu v.State (2002) 2 NWLR (Pt 750) 225 at 236;
Obiakor v. State (2002) 10 NWLR (Pt 776) 612 at 628; Upahar v.State (2003) 6 NWLR (Pt. 816) 230 and Idi v. Yau
(2001) 10 NWLR (Pt 722) 640 at 651

2. Between two or more people – one person cannot agree or conspire with someone that does not conspire
with them. Olusola Oyeleye & anor v. The State (2013)LPELR 20693 CA
USMAN KAZA V. THE STATE 2008 7 N.W.L.R (Part 1085) 125 S.C. – “Conspiracy is a meeting of two or
more minds to plan to carry out an unlawful or illegal act which is an offence and that bare agreement
to commit an offence is sufficient.” See also, Upahar v. State (2003) NWLR (Pt. 81) 230; Ogunye v.
State (2001) 2 NWLR (Pt 697)311; Upahar v.State (2003) 6 NWLR (Pt. 816) 230
 Elements of Conspiracy Contd.
3. To effect illegality and a criminal purpose/to carry out an unlawful act or lawful act by unlawful
Olusola Oyeleye &anor v. The State (2013) LPELR 20693 CA; Haruna &ors v. The State (1972) 819 SC 174
USMAN KAZA V. THE STATE 2008 7 N.W.L.R (Part 1085) 125 S.C.
4. Entered into for the purpose of committing a crime
Kenneth Clark & anor v. State (1986) 4 NWLR (Pt. 35) 381
5. The offence must be capable of being proved by circumstantial evidence
Njovens v. The State (1973) 5 SC 17 – “The gist of the offence of conspiracy is embedded in the
agreement or plot between the parties, it is rarely capable of direct proof. That it is an offence that is
deduced from the act of the parties which is focused towards the realization of the common or
intended purpose
See also, Iboji v. S (2016) NGSC 64; Obiakor v. State (2002) 10 NWLR (Pt 776) 612 at 628; Shonde v.
State (2005) 12 NWLR (Pt 939) 301 at 320/ c
Punishment
Section 516 of the Criminal Code provides that Although, where the highest punishment for
if there is no other stated punishment, a the actual offence is less than seven years, a
person convicted of conspiracy is liable to person who has been convicted of conspiracy
seven years imprisonment. to commit that offence that carries a sentence
that is less than seven years, will receive a
lesser sentence.
 Reference
Bamgbose and Soniyi 2012. Criminal Law in Nigeria pp 120-134
Mrabure, K.O. and Abhulikhen-Ihoha, A. 2020. Examining the Crime of Conspiracy in Nigeria and
Selected Common Wealth Jurisdictions. Journal of Law and Criminal Justice, 8 (1):15-29