Edo’s special court sends clear message: Justice must catch up with kidnappers, by Ejiro Ofoye

The fight against kidnapping and violent crime in Nigeria has often suffered from one debilitating weakness: the distance between arrest and justice. Suspects are arrested, paraded before television cameras, arraigned in court and then, in too many cases, disappear into years of adjournments and procedural delays. For victims and their families, justice becomes an uncertain promise. That is why the judgment delivered on Tuesday, September 29, 2026, by the Edo State Special Criminal Court in Benin City deserves serious national attention. Justice Aigbona Momodu sentenced four defendants — Marvellous Isaac, Wisdom Michael, Rufus Emete Michael and Gift Raphael — to death on several counts arising from a broad-daylight kidnapping at the Vegetable Market along Airport Road, Benin City. The 11-count case included kidnapping, conspiracy, armed robbery, cultism and unlawful possession of firearms.

The case is particularly significant because it represents the maiden kidnapping judgment of Edo State’s Special Criminal Court, established to deal specifically with kidnapping, cultism and related violent offences. The court commenced operations in July 2026 following a request from Governor Monday Okpebholo to the Chief Judge of Edo State for a special court to accelerate the determination of such cases. This is where Justice Momodu deserves recognition — not because he imposed the death penalty as a matter of personal preference, but because his judgment demonstrated an important principle of constitutional democracy: a judge must apply the law, even when the consequences are severe. Indeed, the judge made it clear that the sentence was dictated by the applicable law. “My hands are tied under the law,” he said, explaining that he would have exercised discretion if the law permitted him to do so.

That statement is perhaps one of the most important aspects of the judgment. A judge is not a political actor. A judge does not determine punishment according to public anger, political pressure or personal sentiment. Where legislation prescribes a particular punishment for an offence and the prosecution has established the case beyond reasonable doubt, the court’s responsibility is to apply the law. In this case, Isaac received seven years’ imprisonment on one count, death sentences on counts two to nine, 10 years on another count and life imprisonment on the final count. The other three defendants also received death sentences on the counts for which they were convicted, alongside additional terms of imprisonment. Interestingly, the formal wording of the judgment referred to death “by hanging or through the administration of a lethal injection.” The court nevertheless went on to pronounce the traditional formula that the convicts should be hanged by the neck until dead.

The significance of the wording should not be lost. Under Nigeria’s criminal law, the traditional statutory formulation provides for death by hanging, while the law also sets out procedures following a death sentence, including transmission of the judgment to the appropriate executive authority. A death sentence, therefore, should not be confused with an immediate execution. The Nigerian legal system provides procedures following the imposition of capital punishment, and condemned persons retain whatever appellate and constitutional remedies are available to them under the law.

But beyond the punishment itself, there is another issue Nigerians should examine: the speed with which the Edo justice system has moved this particular case.

The alleged kidnapping occurred on June 14, 2026. By September 29, the special court had delivered its judgment. That does not mean every kidnapping case can or should be concluded within the same period. Each case has its own facts, evidence and procedural requirements. But it demonstrates what can happen when specialised judicial attention is combined with focused prosecution and investigative work. The Edo State Government also deserves recognition for placing the issue of kidnapping and violent crime prominently within its security agenda. In June, following the Airport Road kidnapping, Governor Okpebholo requested the creation of a special court for kidnapping and cultism cases. The Chief Judge subsequently constituted the Special Criminal Court. There is also an important precedent concerning armed robbery.

In May 2025, the Edo State Government announced that the Supreme Court had affirmed the conviction and death sentence of Sunday Osakpolor for armed robbery. The state also reported the conviction of Taiwo Omorede and four others in another armed robbery case, with three receiving death sentences by hanging and two receiving five-year prison terms. These developments show that the present judgment did not emerge in isolation. There has been an established effort by the Edo Ministry of Justice to prosecute serious violent offences through the courts. But the real test is what happens next. Justice must not end with sentencing. The prosecution must remain diligent. Police investigations must be professional. Evidence must be properly preserved. Victims and witnesses must be protected. Appeals must be handled according to law. And the executive authorities must respect the constitutional procedures governing capital punishment.

Most importantly, Edo must ensure that the special court does not become merely a symbol. Its success should ultimately be measured by whether it consistently delivers speedy, fair and lawful justice across kidnapping and cultism cases. For the families of kidnapping victims, the message from the Benin courtroom is simple: the law can still catch up with those who use violence to terrorise citizens. Justice Momodu’s judgment has shown the importance of a judiciary that applies the law without fear or favour. The Edo Government’s creation of a specialised judicial mechanism has also demonstrated the potential value of giving serious criminal cases dedicated judicial attention. The larger lesson for Nigeria is even clearer: the fight against kidnapping cannot be won by rhetoric alone. Arrests must lead to credible investigations, investigations must lead to prosecution, prosecution must lead to fair trials, and where guilt is established, punishment must follow the law. That is how the criminal justice chain is supposed to work. And that is how public confidence in the rule of law is rebuilt.