We are a top law firm known for delivering consistently high-quality legal services across nearly every major area of law.
Who We Are
Ebun-Olu Adegboruwa, SAN & Co. is a powerhouse of professional legal experts and result-oriented workforce that are tailored to deliver valuable legal solutions across all industries.
Meet the Team
Our firm is renowned for combining deep legal expertise with broader insights to handle complex cases, disputes, and regulatory challenges.
Practice Areas
Ours is "the absolute go to firm" for anything complex and time sensitive, a reputation born of deep bench strength and a unified culture of excellence.
Go To Pro Bono
Our Principal's corner is filled with educative and interesting knowledge-based sections that grant you access to his interviews, public lectures, articles while keeping you informed of the law and your legal right.
ExploreEbun-Olu Adegboruwa, SAN & Company is a dynamic Law firm of astute legal practitioners experienced in different fields of the Nigerian legal system.
Our firm is recognized for delivering forward thinking legal counsel, combining modern approaches with local insight to help clients seize business opportunities and navigate change with confidence. Sector expertise is central to our success.
Our lawyers possess deep knowledge of the industries in which our clients operate, enabling us to provide comprehensive advice grounded in real world understanding. For our clients, this translates into service enriched with an added dimension of value.
Our firm provides proactive, expert guidance on rights, responsibilities, and liabilities, helping you navigate contracts, reduce risks, and maintain compliance. Whether you’re growing an SME, safeguarding intellectual property, or resolving disputes, our tailored counsels deliver the clarity and confidence needed to make sound legal decisions.
We are renowned for providing clients with valuable solutions to intricate business and legal issues across various areas covering sectors such as banking & finance, intellectual property, tax, real estate, foreign investment, labour law, mergers and acquisitions etc...
We are a top law firm known for delivering consistently high-quality legal services across nearly every major area of law.
![]() |
Learned Expression
30th April, 2026 Abanobi V the state and the evil of kidnapping (1)INTRODUCTION According to the learned authors of Black's Law Dictionary, kidnapping is "the crime of seizing and taking away a person by force or fraud, often with a demand for ransom (also manstealing)." For Collins English Dictionary, to kidnap is "to carry off and hold (a person), usually for ransom". This is corroborated by the learned authors of Jowitt's Dictionary of English Law as "the forcible abduction or stealing away of a person, whether a man, woman, or child. It is an offence punishable at common law by fine and imprisonment. Morally speaking, it is wrong to steal anything, how much less a human being. In the ordinary course of events, the law frowns at the intent to take away something with the hope of depriving the owner thereof its permanent use. To kidnap a person therefore connotes that the kidnapper intends to deprive the victim of the use of his or her life, which is why the law places the offence of kidnapping in the same status as murder, with some statutes prescribing the maximum penalty of death. When a 98-year-old great-grandmother is kidnapped, then there should be no remedy for the felon, because such a gruesome act borders on irredeemable depravity. There can be no justification for this heinous display of wickedness by the appellant and his gang, although I am well aware of the challenges faced by citizens in our present dispensation, especially the youth. No matter the difficulties that people face or contend with, it cannot ground the seizure or theft of an old woman, subjecting her to such a traumatic experience of keeping her in the trunk of a car, with all the inconveniences and dangers to her life and safety. But for the police and the act of divine intervention, the poor woman would most probably have died from exhaustion and suffocation even before the criminals got to their evil destination. I join the call upon the government to do more in job creation and youth empowerment, but the youth too must embrace contentment, diligence and believe in honest endeavours as the surest means of lasting prosperity and human survival, and stop chasing miracle money and exploring shortcut options to attain sudden wealth. THE FACTS OF THE CASE The facts of this case are as reported in Abanobi v The State (2026) 5 NWLR (Pt.2037) 587. The appellant, acting in concert with his co-accused on 26th October 2014, kidnapped and took hostage one Madam Lydia Acho, a woman of 98 years old. She was purportedly abducted from her residence in Isuikwuato Local Government Area in Abia State. However, she was subsequently rescued on the same day within Ikuwano Local Government Area in Abia State following a car chase by the police. The appellant and the 2nd accused person were later apprehended at the locus criminis with the appellant having sustained gunshot wounds. PW2, during her testimony, left the witness box to identify the appellant and the co-accused person in the dock. Under cross-examination, she stated that she was able to identify the appellant and his co-accused by the illumination from a flashlight. The police officer who led the patrol team that accosted the appellant and his co-marauders and rescued the victim testified as PW4. He gave evidence of how the appellant and the co-marauders were accosted by the patrol team while inside a Peugeot 406 wagon vehicle with which the victim was kidnapped. The driver of the vehicle lost control and rammed it into a tree and the occupants, including the appellant ran into the surrounding bushes. The police shot at the occupants of the vehicle while they were trying to escape and noticed blood at the scene. Upon approaching the vehicle, the police rescued the victim from the boot of the vehicle and took her to the hospital. With the help of the community vigilantes, the appellant, with a bullet wound, and the 2nd accused person were arrested from the bush. The appellant's two phone handsets were recovered from the vehicle. Following his apprehension, the appellant made a statement to the police, exhibit "B", and was the sole witness in his defence. His story was that he too was kidnapped by the two passengers he carried in the Peugeot wagon on his way from his village in Anambra State to Aba. He admitted that he was in the vehicle with which the victim was kidnapped and taken away. He was there when the police led by PW4 accosted them, the vehicle rammed into a tree, the police shot at them and he bolted and ran inside the bush and slept there till the following morning for his safety. He further testified that on the following morning he came out from his purported concealment within the bush with the aim of reporting the incident of kidnapping at the police station. However, contrary to his alleged intention, he was instead apprehended by the police and subsequently charged with the very act of kidnapping he intended to report. He stated that he was released by the fleeing kidnappers amidst a barrage of gunfire, one of which hit him. However, in his extra-judicial statement, he claimed that he remained in the trunk of the car while one of the two alleged hijackers stood guard over him. At the conclusion of trial, the trial court in its judgment convicted the appellant and sentenced him to death for the offence of kidnapping contrary to section 3(a) of the Prohibition of Terrorism, Kidnapping, Hostage-Taking, Use of Offensive Weapons or Explosives and Other Threatening Behaviour Law No. 10 of Abia State, 2009. Dissatisfied, the appellant appealed to the Court of Appeal which affirmed the judgment of the trial court and dismissed his appeal. Still dissatisfied, the appellant appealed to the Supreme Court where he contended that the respondent failed to prove the offence charged as there was no evidence that he kidnapped the victim for the purpose of payment of ransom. In determining the appeal with final dismissal, the Supreme Court considered the provision of section 3(a) of the Prohibition of Terrorism, Kidnapping, Hostage-Taking, Use of Offensive Weapons or Explosives and Other Threatening Behaviour Law, No. 10 of Abia State, 2009, which states as follows: "3(a) Any person who, for the purpose of payment of ransom, kidnaps and takes another hostage is guilty of an offence." What constitutes offence of kidnapping: Section 3(a) of the Prohibition of Terrorism, Kidnapping, Hostage-Taking, Use of Offensive Weapons or Explosives and Other Threatening Behaviour Law No. 10 of Abia State, 2009 stipulates that any person who, for the purpose of payment of ransom, kidnaps and takes another person hostage is guilty of an offence. The section suggests an acknowledgment of the distinction between the offence of kidnapping as understood within broader legal jurisprudence and the specific instance contemplated under that legislation where the element of "for purposes of payment of ransom" is expressly incorporated as a necessary and constituent element for establishing guilt. The distinction is pertinent when considering the general principles governing the offence of kidnapping. What Constitutes Offence of Kidnapping: Section 3(a) of the Prohibition of Terrorism, Kidnapping, Hostage-Taking, Use of Offensive Weapons or Explosives and Other Threatening Behaviour Law No. 10 of Abia State, 2009, prescribes that the kidnapping and taking another hostage must have been actuated by the intention to ask for or for the purposes of payment of ransom. It does not provide that for the offence of kidnapping to be complete, the ransom must have been paid. It only prescribes manifestation of an intention by the abductor to demand or obtain payment of ransom. What this postulates is that where the definition of kidnapping includes abduction for some specific purpose, the mens rea that the prosecution must prove in order to obtain a conviction must include the specific purpose. Therefore, it is not enough to prove that the defendant intended to abduct the victim. In order to secure a conviction of the defendant, the prosecution must prove that the defendant abducted the victim with the specific intention of obtaining payment of ransom. There must be an indication on the part of the defendant of trying to obtain an advantage or holding the victim for ransom. The prosecution has to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the accused intended to detain the alleged victim in order to demand and obtain a sum of money for the alleged victim"s release. It does not matter whether the defendant in fact demanded money or whether the defendant succeeded in obtaining any money. There must be some overt act manifesting that intention. In the instant case, it was clear that the intention of the appellant and his co-accused was to kidnap and take the victim for the purpose of payment of ransom. Contrary to the appellant's submission, both the trial court and the Court of Appeal did not speculate on whether the victim was kidnapped for the purpose of ransom. The intention of the appellant and his co-accused person to demand ransom could be inferred from their conduct, given the overall circumstances of the case. The ingredients of the offence were established against the appellant. The Probable Motivations for Kidnapping: The jurisprudence of the offence of kidnapping extends beyond instances solely motivated by demand for payment of ransom. Criminals take hostages as a shield to help them escape from the scene of a crime. In addition, kidnapping could also be motivated by personal grudges. |
![]() |
30th April, 2026 Constitution amendment: What NASS has done is mere tokenism -AdegboruwaA member of the Lagos Judicial Panel on Police Brutality during the #EndSARS protest, rights activist and Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), Mr Ebun-Olu Adegboruwa speaks to DARE ADEKANMBI on the ongoing constitution amendment by the National Assembly, the presidential materials on offer and 2023 elections. The National Assembly members accepted some robust proposals concerning ongoing efforts at amending the 1999 Constitution. Are you happy about some of the accepted recommendations? I am not [happy] in any way at all. Why? What the National Assembly has done is mere tokenism. It is just scratching the surface of the real issues plaguing our country. We are not running a federation. It is unitary system of government that we have currently. It is not correct to just be handing over bits and pieces to the states, regions and local government councils, as if there is no equality of status. Power should go down to the owners, that is, the states, local government and the regions. The Federal Government has no business holding on to all the issues and items that bring money to the federation. The Federal Government should just be an administrative centre. So, all the things they voted upon have no relevance to our demand for true federalism. The APC, when it was canvassing for votes in 2015, promised devolution of powers and what we understood by that is that there will be resource control first. The regions that have the natural resources within their domains will be allowed considerable freedom. Osun and Zamfara states should be able to mine their gold; Ondo should be able to mine its oil and Oyo State should be allowed to take care of its cocoa, gold and everything that is there. The same thing should apply to the North where the northerners should be allowed the control of their natural resources and they pay royalty to the centre. None of these things has been tackled at all by the National Assembly. All this window-dressing of reforms does not make any impact on our demand for true federalism. Our lawmakers should summon the courage to address the yearnings of Nigerians so that the country can move forward. There reason there is corruption is that there is too much money at the federal level for which nothing is being done, no projects are being executed. Give the money to the owners so that people can take their destinies into their own hands and move the country forward. What the National Assembly is doing is not acceptable at all. Why can't we have state police? Who is scared? Look at the success of Amotekun in the South-West. Who is scared? But some Nigerians have applauded the removal of VAT from Exclusive List to the Concurrent List for states to also have power over this tax? That is why I called it tokenism. VAT is a value added tax, a product of certain events in terms of sales, commerce and consumption. Those are just paltry things. The main resource of the country is what each region has as an advantage. There is no reason for the Federal Government to be sitting on that. That is the core issue behind the clamour for devolution of power, resource control and independence for the states. What is the Fedral Government doing by legislating central admission to schools and education of children when our youths are suffering, no universities to admit them. Lawyers graduate from universities and can't go to law school because there is a central system of controlling those who get admission into law school. For God's sake, in 21 century? Why can't Rivers State build its own law school and all its citizens who graduate from its own university can go there and be trained? Why can't Lagos, Kano and other states have their own law schools? That is what is happening in the United States, United Kingdom and other jurisdictions. Why will children be writing a common examination called UTME in order to secure admission to universities and they are frustrating them every day. They said some states are educationally disadvantaged and somebody who passes on merit is asked to be on the waiting line for somebody who did not pass. In what sane society do you see such a thing? Do you see this tokenistic attempt, to use your phraseology, as a prelude to the clamour for restructuring because electricity, railway and other items are now on the Concurrent List? But this is not what the government promised us. I want to emphasise that when APC was canvassing for votes in order to displace the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), APC entered into a social contract with Nigerians for total devolution of powers by amending the constitution or writing a new constitution. In demonstration of that, the party set up a committee headed by the Kaduna State governor, Nasir el-Rufai on restructuring. Where is the report? Why are they scratching the surface? They know what Nigerians want which is restructuring and which was why we voted them into power. Why is APC chickening out now? That is the point I am making. There is no need for us to be dancing around and be doing a prelude. Let's go into the main action and let Nigeria move forward. Do you see the current National Assembly summoning the courage to go the whole hog of bringing about the fundamental changes required in the law for the good governance of the country? It is not about whether they have the courage, but whether they can continue like this for another time. There are so many of these people in the parliament in Abuja who can no longer go to their constituencies either for reason of insurgency, kidnapping or the poverty that has enveloped their constituencies. Many of them are sojourners in Abuja who are unable to relate with the people who voted for them. How long can they continue to pretend? This is what is at the core of the crisis in the country. No employment, mass poverty, no infrastructure and it is all because of corruption. The Federal Government is sitting on all the goldmine that makes this country Nigeria and somebody will sit in Abuja and be doing portfolio oil well and be selling oil through telephone. This is what is making Nigeria not to go forward. That is why we are saying we can't be scratching this thing on the surface and be giving us tokens. We want to go to the meat of the matter. Let there be true federalism or those who make peaceful change impossible will make violent change inevitable. This system will consume the parliamentarians themselves if they don't take the courage to do the needful. It is not about conducting elections in 2023. We must define the basis of our federalism. We must address the fundamental issue of resource management, political power. Let's go back to the Uwais Panel report. Let's go back to the 2014 National Conference report. Let's go back to the el-Rufai report. Why are they hiding these things? It is wickedness on the part of our leaders. If they don't summon the courage to do the needful, many of them will be swallowed over time by the crisis that they have imposed on the rest of us. Another general election is 11 months away. Do you see any fundamental change in the way Nigerians will vote? I think that what we have advocated is that the constitution recognizes zoning in Section 14 of the constitution which talks about not allowing a particular ethnic group or a particular set of people to be in dominance. You saw how it played out recently when the Minister of Education was asked at a press conference the reason for sustaining the cut off mark in Unity Schools and not allow merit to its place in admission to Unity Schools that belong to the federation. He said it is because of federal character which is being implemented to ensure that states which don't have enough students are allowed to be lifted above the rest. So, federal character is being implemented in favour of those particular states. Then, federal character should be implemented for political power. Otherwise, there is injustice. You can't be implementing the constitution to favour you in the areas where you have disadvantage and then you refuse to implement it in the areas where others have and want advantage. It will not be fair. It will not be fair if the region that has produced the president from 2015 to 2023 to still be contesting for the presidency. This will add to the crisis in the land. If you agree on a particular position for a particular region at a particular time, then you should let it cut across. So, the first thing is that there must be zoning. The president in 2023 should come from the Southern part of the country, whether it is South-East, South-South or South-West. That will be when we will know we are running a federation. If for any reason, either due to population or rigging or any misappropriation of political power, the presidency goes back to the same region where President Muhammadu Buhari comes from, then we will know there is no country. Democracy and election are numbers game. If the North votes more than we do in the South, then it means they will be right to have it. Then, education should also be by merit. If children sit for an examination and the only people that pass are from the South, then let them get admitted into all the schools in the country. Admission should also be by merit. If we want to use merit, let it be general. But they can't be implanting federal character to their own advantage and then sit on it when it comes to the turn of others. That is what I am saying. If you have population as an advantage and you want to be using it, then you must concede to those who have intellect as well so that when you take the benefit, you also take your own burden. Do you foresee a likely shift in paradigm in the way Southerners will vote in 2023 because the Northerners seem to have this huge political consciousness at election and this appears absent in the South? This is the reason we are Nigeria. It is possible for a particular section to have a consciousness in a particular area as their own advantage, just the same way in the South, here there is consciousness for education. Every average Southerner wants to go to school. It is possible that the average person in the North wants to go to the army or wants to go and collect PVC. Everybody has his own advantage. That is why we came together to say unity in progress. So, you can't use your consciousness for political power to dominate others who have consciousness for other things and you are not allowing them to use their consciousness to their advantage. So, it makes no sense to say because the Northerners have political consciousness, that puts them at an advantage to be ruling us forever. Other people have consciousness for other things and that consciousness has not enabled them to dominate those who don't have the consciousness. So, we are asking for a level-playing field. We can't claim that because of those who have consciousness to collect PVC to go and vote, others should wait forever. A number of people have been offering themselves as presidential materials, crisscrossing the country on consultations. When you look at those on the field now, any hope of a messiah emerging from among them? I honestly think our focus should be the system that will produce these people because once the system is proper, the constitution is properly drafted and the institutions are strengthened, it will be immaterial who gets to power. Everything [Donald] Trump did to frustrate the American election, the institutions of the country overpowered him because the system had been arranged to function at its optimal level. So, whether the individuals who are indicating to be president now have the capacity and understanding is really a function of the system that will produce them. My focus won't be on the individuals, but to ensure we structure our system in such a way that whoever emerges will follow the trend that Nigerians have outlined for their own prosperity. That is my own understanding. Once the system is right, whosever comes up, must fall in line. So, we need to amend the constitution properly in such a way that it will guarantee common prosperity for the common good of the peoples of Nigeria, ensure that the rule of impunity is arrested, see that the fundamental rights of people are guaranteed, ensure there is press freedom and liberty for the courts. Once these things are taken care of, an individual will not be able to manipulate us. In other words, you don't see age as a factor? Well, age is a factor, no doubt, and I believe so. For instance, President Buhari himself admitted that much of his handicap came by reason of his age. So, given our medical system and our environment, the elderly are at disadvantage in Nigeria unlike in the United States where you see 70 years old people still ruling in power because their system functions very well. Life expectancy is higher and the environment is conducive to be able to allow our healthcare system to take care of the ageing people. It is not the same in Nigeria. So, in that regard, I believe age is also important. This particular government brought the idea not-too-young to rule in encouraging younger people to get to power. So, it should stick to its own policy. |
We can help you make critical decisions using our legal framework and valuable experience in legal matters. A one-on-one guidance with our experts will highlight your key issues, common initiatives and help you achieve your mission-critical priorities.
Lagos
Lekki Law Center
'Kogun Chambers, Jesus Arena'
Ebun-Olu Adegboruwa SAN & Co.,
Plot 1, Ebun-Olu Adegboruwa Lane
Itedo/Freedom Way,
Lekki Phase 1,
Lagos, Nigeria.
08033016673, 08033246500, 08100000758
info@adegboruwalaw.com, adegboruwalaw@yahoo.com
Abuja
Abuja Law Center
No. 12 Winston Churchill Street,
Asokoro,
FCT, Abuja,
Nigeria.
08033016673, 08033246500, 08100000759
info@adegboruwalaw.com, adegboruwalaw@yahoo.com
Copyright © All rights reserved | MAIL

