Teen Girl Jailed for Life Over Murder of University Lecturer in Minna
A recent ruling by the Minna High Court, sentencing a 16-year-old girl to life imprisonment for her involvement in the 2023 murder of Associate Professor Funmilola Adefolalu of the Federal University of Technology, Minna, has ignited a crucial debate about the intersection of justice, accountability, and child rights in Nigeria.
The accused, identified as Afekafe, who served as a housemaid to the late lecturer, committed the heinous crime at the age of 14 alongside accomplices who remain at large. Justice Mohammed Adishetu Mohammed found her guilty of both murder and armed robbery, citing the use of knives and a wooden stool in the brutal attack.
While the Penal Code of Niger State prescribes the death penalty for such grave offenses, the presiding judge considered the girl’s age and opted for a life sentence instead. However, this decision has raised significant concerns among child rights advocates, as it appears to contravene the provisions of Nigeria’s Child’s Rights Act (CRA) and the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC). Both international and national instruments unequivocally prohibit life imprisonment for offenses committed by individuals under the age of 18.
It has been argued that such a severe sentence risks transforming a child offender into a lifelong prisoner, thereby denying her any realistic opportunity for reform, education, or reintegration into society. The core philosophy of child justice is often centered on healing and rehabilitation rather than solely on punishment.
A Breach of National and International Child Protection Standards
Nigeria is a signatory to the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC) and has domesticated its principles through the Child’s Rights Act (CRA) 2003, which is binding in the Federal Capital Territory and has been adopted in several states, including Niger State under the Niger State Child Right Law 2010.
Both the UNCRC (Article 37) and CRA of Nigeria (2003) (Section 221) explicitly prohibit life imprisonment or capital punishment for offenses committed by individuals under the age of 18. These instruments emphasize the need for rehabilitation, reintegration, and reformative justice, not retributive justice for child offenders.
Sentencing a 16-year-old to life imprisonment for a crime committed at age 14 not only violates the spirit and letters of these laws but also disregards the evolving capacity of children and their right to a second chance.
Principles Governing Children in Conflict with the Law
1. Non-Punitive Measures and Diversion Programs
Modern juvenile justice frameworks emphasize diversion and non-punitive alternatives to criminal prosecution. The CRA and international instruments encourage diversion programs that redirect children away from judicial proceedings toward rehabilitative services.
- Restorative Justice: Encourages dialogue between the offender and the victim’s family, promoting accountability and healing.
- Rehabilitative Programs: Offer psychosocial support, counselling, education, and skill acquisition to help children reintegrate into society.
- Reformative Discipline: Ensures children grasp the weight of their actions while respecting their dignity.
2. Best Interests of the Child
Section 1 of the CRA 2003 affirms that “in every action concerning the child… the best interests of the child shall be the primary consideration.” Life imprisonment for a child, a measure that permanently removes the possibility of meaningful reintegration, is a contradiction of this principle.
3. Dignity and Respect
Every child, regardless of the gravity of their offense, is entitled to respect for their dignity and worth. Punitive incarceration, especially when indefinite, undermines a child’s right to humane treatment, emotional recovery, and transformation.
What Must Be Done
This case is emblematic of a broader systemic failure to align Nigeria’s juvenile justice system with its legal commitments and developmental aspirations.
Recommendations
1. Strengthen Diversion Mechanisms
Establish and enforce diversion programs involving social workers, counsellors, and community leaders. Alternatives like community service, supervised release, or youth rehabilitation centers should be the default response to serious offenses by children.
2. Establish Specialized Juvenile Justice Systems
Create dedicated Family and Juvenile Courts with personnel trained in child psychology, trauma-informed care, and restorative practices. Judges, prosecutors, and law enforcement must receive mandatory training on handling child offenders.
3. Ensure Accountability for Rights Violations
Courts and law enforcement agencies must be held accountable when they violate child rights laws. Civil society and oversight bodies must challenge illegal or inappropriate sentences through appeal mechanisms or public advocacy.
Conclusion
There is no denying the gravity of the offense committed. A life was tragically lost, and justice must be pursued. However, justice for children cannot mirror justice for adults. Children possess a unique capacity for change, growth, and rehabilitation. Systems that discard them after one act, no matter how heinous risk perpetuating violence, marginalization, and systemic failure.
Children in conflict with the law must be afforded dignity and provided genuine opportunities to reform, learn, and ultimately thrive. A just society recognizes the capacity for change in its youngest members and prioritizes their future over retribution.
