Supreme Court’s travesty on Sunday Jackson

By Pius Mordi

Sunday Jackson is a farmer in his community in Adamawa State. While working in his farm sometime in 2020, he was attacked by a Fulani man who posed as a herdsman.

Characteristic of his ilk, Ardo Buba Bawuro, the herder, was armed with a machete with the intention to kill Jackson, dealing several blows on him. But Jackson was better and smarter.

Despite bleeding from the two cuts he sustained, he managed to disarm Bawuro and dealt him fatal blows. Bawuro died from his injury while Jackson survived.

When Police intervened, Jackson was arrested and the Adamawa Director of Prosecution deemed that Jackson had committed murder and charged him to court with murder. He admitted that he fought back on being attacked by Bawuro who died from the altercation.

Justice Fatima Ahmed Tafida who sat over the case upheld the prosecution’s argument that Jackson committed murder and sentence him to death. In her view, Jackson should have run away rather than fight Bawuro. Strangely, the Court of Appeal upheld the Justice Fatima Ahmed Tafida’s judgement. If the appeal court’s ruling was strange, that of the Supreme Court was baffling. The apex court agreed that Jackson should have run away rather than fight back.

For daring to stand his ground on his farm and fight to stay alive, the Supreme Court ordered that Jackson should die. Yes, he is about the only one who survived a violent attack by an herdsman. And for successfully fighting back and staying alive while his attacker died from his injuries, the lordships in Supreme Court ruled on March 7, 2025 that Jackson should die.

The judicial assassination of a survivor of a farmer whose only crime is that he had the audacity to fend off an attack by a Fulani and even kill him in the process had attracted global attention, especially legal experts. Having established that Jackson was the victim of an audacious attack in his farm, extant laws which recognise the right of individuals to fight back say Jackson only engaged in self defence.

Rather, Justice Fatima Tafida chose to misinterpret Section 23 of the Adamawa State Penal Code Laws to mean that Jackson should have fled and not fight in self-defense.

Besides, the judgement of the Adamawa High Court was said to have been given well outside the 90 days provided in the constitution after the adoption of final written addresses of counsel to the prosecution and the defence for judgement to be given. After the prosecution concluded its argument and Jackson testified for himself on February 27, 2020, the case was adjourned to August 27, 2020 for the adoption of final written addresses of counsel to the prosecution and the defence. Between the adoption of written addresses by counsel to both parties and the February 10, 2021 date of judgement by Justice Tafida, 167 days had elapsed.

Given the time lapse, Ngozi Molokwu, CEO of Injustice Is Real, questioned the credibility of the judgement.

“This clearly proves that due to the prolonged period of time from close of arguments to the rendering of judgment – a whopping 167 days – almost double the constitutional 90 days – the judge had confused the facts of the case resulting in a horrendous miscarriage of justice and as such it must be voided”, said Emmanuel Ogebe, and attorney and international human rights advocate.

He said that from prosecution’s brief of argument, it is patently clear that Jackson’s constitutional right and protection of self defense were unjustly and injudiciously denied him by the trial judge.
As the audacity of attacks by Fulani terrorists masquerading as cattle herders have been rising in intensity without any concerted strategy and effort by security agencies to rein them in, Nigerians had long concluded that the security architecture had been rigged to not just shield the herders from being answerable to the law but even being provided support by some elements among the security agencies.

Now, from the suspected security coverage for the terrorists and the Supreme Court’s verdict on Sunday Jackson, there is the growing belief that even the judiciary may have become complicit in the attacks.

As Jackson was the one farming on his land when he was attacked by an intruder, legal experts say the law on self defence should have justified his action that led to Ardo Bawuro’s death. But even if the Adamawa Director of Public Prosecution felt Ardo Bawuro’s death could have been avoided, which is actually untenable, the worst he could have been charged Jackson with is manslaughter.

By the Supreme Court decision, however, the judiciary has given the impression that it is an enabler of the murderous gang of Fulani terrorists in a game of killing, rape, kidnap, occupation and genocide.

As communities in Benue state are now routinely sacked and their occupied, the Supreme Court bears vicarious responsibility for the rising audacious attacks by the Fulani.
According to Open Doors’ 2025 World Watch List, Nigeria ranks seventh on the list of the 50 worst countries for Christians, remaining among the most dangerous places on earth for them. Of the 4,476 Christians killed for their faith worldwide during the reporting period, 3,100 (69 percent) were in Nigeria, according to the WWL.

Judgements as that given by the Supreme Court reinforce the perception that the country is being overrun by religious extremists, protected and egged on by the state.

Jackson has been in detention since 2020 when he was arranged for refusing to allow a Fulani kill him in his farm. Unfortunately, the apex court was the last platform where justice would have been dispensed. It chose to sell its soul. Jackson is now on death row awaiting state murder. It is something that cannot be stomached by large sections of the country.

It is up to Governor Ahmadu Umaru Fintiri to save Nigeria from its darkest hour since the civil war by giving unconditional state pardon to Jackson. His murder, if it happens, portends a future too dark to imagine.