The Abuse of Presidential Power of Pardon and the Need for Restraints

Udofa, Imo J.

doi:10.4236/blr.2018.92008

Cited by 4 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Il punto di partenza della ricerca nasce da una preliminare constatazione: il potere di grazia, tema di rilevanza interdisciplinare (Pisani 2007;Ruckman jr. 2012) e oggetto di analisi in chiave comparativa (Sebba 1977;Novak 2016;Udofa 2018), è stato studiato, oltre che in ambito giuridico, soprattutto in quello storico (per l'Italia, cfr. fra gli altri Stronati, 2009;Nubola 2001Nubola , 2011Nubola , 2019 e specificamente di history of crime and criminal justice (Verreycken 2019), mentre più limitatamente in ambito sociologico e, in particolare, sociologico-giuridico (per es.…”

Section: Il Corpus Documentale Oggetto DI Analisiunclassified

“Parere contrario”

Altobelli,

Tibursi

2023

sodir

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Il presente lavoro prende in esame, in una prospettiva sociologica, l’esercizio del potere di grazia del Presidente della Repubblica, uno degli istituti più peculiari dell’ordinamento giuridico. Nell’ambito di un progetto più ampio che affronta aspetti teorici e impiega metodologie di ricerca quantitativa e qualitativa, in questo articolo si presentano i primi risultati di un’analisi sociologico-giuridica focalizzata sulle pratiche di grazia richieste da donne e non concesse, con particolare riferimento a casi in cui sia stato espresso “parere contrario”, relative alle Presidenze di Luigi Einaudi e in minima parte di Giovanni Gronchi, presenti nel Fondo Ministero di Grazia e Giustizia. Direzione generale Affari penali grazie e casellario. Ufficio Grazie. Pratiche di grazia relative a condanne di Corti di Assise 1949-1955, presso l’Archivio Centrale dello Stato. Dopo la presentazione delle domande della ricerca e degli aspetti metodologici, dello specifico repertorio documentale analizzato e del dataset costruito per lo studio, si discutono i termini del profilo socio-demografico delle richiedenti grazia ottenuto attraverso una metodologia quantitativa contestualizzata su fonti demografiche e storiche.

show abstract

Section: Il Corpus Documentale Oggetto DI Analisiunclassified

“Parere contrario”

Altobelli,

Tibursi

2023

sodir

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It appears to be a product of some factors. First, the court must have been goaded by the belief, albeit erroneous, that the only just ground for exercising the power of pardon is for the enhancement of justice (Udofa, 2018). 3 Closely linked with this is the belief that the power of pardon is only available for the correction of errors noticeable in the criminal justice system.…”

Section: Nature and Extent Of The Presidential Power Of Pardon In Nig...mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Secondly, the risks of abuse in pre-conviction pardons are too much more significant than in a pre-conviction pardon. This must-have weighed heavily in the mind of the Nigerian judiciary in taking the position that section 175 of the Constitution does not envisage a pre-conviction pardon as pre-conviction pardons are capable of opening doors so vast for fraud (Udofa, 2018). Of course, when a suspect makes representation to the Governor or the President as the case may be, for the exercise of pardon power in his or her favour prior to trial, how is the Governor or President to know whether his representations are true or not?…”

Section: Nature and Extent Of The Presidential Power Of Pardon In Nig...mentioning

confidence: 99%

An Appraisal of the Power of Pardon under Nigerian Law: Lessons from Other Jurisdictions

Ngwoke¹,

Abayomi²

2022

BLR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The exercise of the presidential pardon power has generated periodic controversies and elicited various reform proposals in Nigeria. The power is often exercised in ways that are clearly at odds with the Nigerian Society's interest, including granting pardons to facilitate narrow partisan interest and other personal ends. Sections 175 and 212 of the Nigerian Constitution, which codifies in Nigeria the sovereign pardon powers available in Britain, worsens the problem and fails to provide guidelines or standards for exercising the power. The need to rationalize and curb pardons has raised significant concerns among legal practitioners as to whether the pardon power is a preor post-conviction instrument, with the Nigerian judiciary weighing in on the side of the post-conviction argument as a way of making pardons fit unto a retributive and equitable system of distributing justice to offenders. Using doctrinal research method, this paper examined the total amplitude of the power within the narrow confines of this riposte provoking issue, especially in the light of the text of the Constitution and the justification or otherwise of the position of the Nigerian judiciary. The paper also adopted the comparative approach by critically examining the position obtainable in the U.K. and USA on the pardon powers of the head of state, and concluded that Nigeria must follow the tradition prevalent in these Common Law countries where the full effect of the power is limitless to the pre-or post-conviction stage.

show abstract

An Appraisal of the Legal Framework on Parole in Nigeria

Ayinde

2022

PER.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Parole is a new correctional measure in the Nigerian penal system. Before 2015 inmates could be released before the expiration of their terms of imprisonment only if they were granted pardons by the governor of a state or by the president. However, this has changed with the coming into force of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act of 2015 (ACJA). The ACJA empowers courts, upon the recommendation of the comptroller-general of the Nigerian Correctional Service, to release inmates on parole. The ACJA also states the two conditions that the comptroller-general must consider before he recommends inmates for parole. The first condition is that the inmates must be of good behaviour, and the second is that the inmates must have served their non-parole periods. While there is no ambiguity on the first condition, the scope of the second condition is not well stated in the ACJA. The ACJA states that inmates that are sentenced to at least fifteen years or life imprisonment must have served at least one-third of their sentence before they can be recommended for parole. However, the ACJA does not state the minimum period that inmates who are sentenced to less than fifteen years of imprisonment must have served before they can be recommended for parole by the comptroller-general. Second, life imprisonment in Nigeria theoretically means imprisonment for the remaining period of the natural life of the inmates upon whom such a sentence has been imposed. In this light it is not clear how the comptroller-general would calculate one-third of an indeterminate sentence for the purpose of determining when to recommend such inmates for parole. Another notable omission in the ACJA is that it does not state the conditions that courts may attach to the release of inmates on parole. Also, ACJA does not make provision for medical parole. To make parole an effective correctional measure in Nigeria, this article suggests that the ACJA should be amended to address all these weaknesses.

show abstract

The Abuse of Presidential Power of Pardon and the Need for Restraints

Cited by 4 publications

References 3 publications

“Parere contrario”

“Parere contrario”

An Appraisal of the Power of Pardon under Nigerian Law: Lessons from Other Jurisdictions

An Appraisal of the Legal Framework on Parole in Nigeria

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About