Structured Sentencing in Nigeria: An overview of the Gombe State Courts (Custodial and Non-Custodial) Sentencing Practice Directions, 2025 -By Alhussain Ibrahim, Esq.

Introduction

Sentence is the verdict formally pronounced by the court or Judge upon an accused person after his conviction in a criminal prosecution, imposing the punishment to be inflicted. Historically, Nigerian courts have exercised broad discretion in sentencing, guided principally by statutory provisions, judicial precedents, and an individualized assessment of the circumstances of each case. However, concerns regarding inconsistency, disproportionality, and overcrowding of correctional centres have prompted reforms aimed at standardizing sentencing procedures.
Sequel to the foregoing, the Gombe State Courts (Custodial and Non-Custodial Sentencing) Practice Directions, 2025 emerged. It was signed by Hon. Justice Halima S. Mohammed, the Chief judge of Gombe State on 14th July, 2025. The Practice Directions herein referred to as (“the Directions”) provide a comprehensive framework applicable across all courts vested with criminal jurisdiction in the State. It provides a detailed guidance on offence categorization, culpability and harm analysis, structured sentencing proportions, and the comprehensive use of non-custodial alternatives.

The Directions was issued pursuant to section 274 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended) and section 496 (f) and (g) of the Gombe State Administration of Criminal Justice Law, 2020 (ACJL). It is applicable to the Courts exercising criminal jurisdiction in Gombe State.

Therefore, the Directions constitute a significant element of the statutory framework governing criminal justice administration in Gombe State. It consists of nine (9) orders outlined hereunder:
• Order 1, general provisions
• Order 2, offences against the state
• Order 3, offences against person
• Order 4, offences against public order
• Order 5, offences against morality
• Order 6, homicide related offences
• Order 7, offences against property
• Order 8, corruption and financial crimes related offences
• Order 9, miscellaneous provisions.
• Schedules

The Directions provides three overarching objectives aimed at ensuring uniformity, proportionality, and fairness through standardized sentencing criteria. It Regulates the use of custodial sentences and encourage application of non-custodial measures to reduce prison congestion. This aligns the Directions with global sentencing standards of structured discretion, alternatives to incarceration, and rehabilitation of offenders.
Notable Provisions of the Practice Directions

1. Age:

One of the notable provisions of the Directions is that it is only applicable to persons of eighteen (18) years and above. Any doubt as to whether the convict attained eighteen years of age is to be resolved in favour of the convict. This provision on doubt aligns with section 438(2)(h) of the Gombe State ACJL and article 1:2 (4) of the Lagos State Non-Custodial Sentencing Practice Directions, 2025.
However, the provisions of the Administration of Criminal justice Act, 2015 on the age of the defendant or convict is slightly different. The Act provides for seventeen (17) years of age.

2. Culpability:

The Directions classified culpability into two categories in all the offences. For instance, culpability concerning offences against the state are categorised as follows:

a. High Culpability is demonstrated through features such as significant degree of premeditation, leading role, type of weapon used, or deliberate exploitation, rampant nature of offence, injury to person, damage to property, grave risk to national security, etc

b. Low Culpability is indicated by lack of premeditation, emotional disturbance, impaired capacity, voluntary disclosure of offence, minimal planning, coercion, immaturity, duress, subordinate roles, etc

3. Harm:

Whereas harm is classified into three categories in all the offences. For instance, harm regarding offences against the state is categorised as follows:

a. Serious Harm: including death, permanent injury, grave psychological outcomes, or threats to public order or national security.

b. Substantial Harm: significant but no severe injuries or losses.

c. Limited Harm: minor injuries, limited disturbance, or low-level impact.
The culpability and harm matrix forms the foundation of offence categorization and determines sentencing ranges across all type of offences.

4. Percentage Points:

The Directions as well provides for the use of percentage-based starting points, tied to statutory sentences. For instance, offences against the state. This model is also laudable, it reduces subjectivity and ensures proportionality.

5. Maximum Sentence:

The Directions provides that maximum sentence is not allowed on a first-time offender except in a mandatory sentence. This is remarkable and in line with the decision of the Court of Appeal in Ayaka v. State. It is obvious that first-time offenders may have some leniency by the court during sentencing.

6. Non-Custodial Sentences:

The Directions significantly amplified the provisions of the ACJL and Gombe State Administration of Criminal Justice Practice Direction, 2023 on non-custodial sentence. It allows the courts to impose the following:

a. Fines
b. Probation
c. Suspended sentences
d. Community service
e. Compensation
f. Restitution and

g. Any other non-custodial sentence as may be prescribed by the State law.

It is imperative to state that non-custodial options apply only where the offence falls within Low Culpability plus Limited Harm and where mitigating circumstances exist. Courts must also consider public safety, offender history, and availability of implementation facilities.

This aligns with global criminal justice reforms emphasizing restorative justice and effective use of alternatives to imprisonment, especially for first time offenders. The instant provision is similar with what is obtained in the Lagos State Non-Custodial Sentencing Practice Directions, 2025.

7. Aggravating and Mitigating Factors:

Each offence category in the Directions contains an extensive catalogue of factors that may justify increasing or reducing sentences. For offence against the state, Order 2 Rules 4 capture all the aggravating and mitigating factors. This provision is in line with section 370(3) of the ACJL and Order XVI Rules 3(a) of the Gombe State ACJL Practice Directions, 2023 which allow courts to consider aggravating and mitigating factors during sentencing. Nevertheless, the Sentencing Directions is more extensive, it went further to provide a list of the aggravating and mitigating factors.

8. Sentencing hearing:

Order 1 Rules 9 introduced sentencing hearing by the courts within 14 days of conviction. Defendants may call witnesses as to his character or to mitigate punishment, while the prosecution may also call witnesses or present evidences in rebuttal. The courts in all categories of offences in the Directions shall:

a. Consider all the nine (9) procedural steps under the relevant Order.

b. Give reasons for the sentence.

c. Apply the totality principle in cases of multiple offences.

d. Consider the period spent in custody.
This is equally commendable. The ACJL and the Gombe State ACJL Practice Direction, 2023 all recognises sentencing hearing. However, the Sentencing Directions provides a procedure for the sentencing hearing. Remarkably, it regulated the period for sentencing hearing. The hearing shall not exceed 14 days from date of conviction.

9. Implementation Challenges:

The Gombe State Sentencing Practice Directions, 2025 which was recently signed, may face some challenges, including:

a. Limited training and round-table discussion among the relevant stakeholders.

b. Frail infrastructure for non-custodial sentencing.

c. Absence of a consistent criminal records database.

d. Lack of awareness on non-custodial sentence and the shift from broad judicial discretion to structured sentencing.

e. Insufficient victim support systems, and monitoring mechanisms that will ensure uniformity and adherence to the Directions across all courts.

10. Recommendations:

a. Non-custodial alternatives should be utilised by the courts where appropriate, especially for low culpability and limited harm offences, to reduce prison congestion and support offender rehabilitation.

b. Implement monitoring and review mechanisms to assess the application of these sentencing guidelines periodically. This can allow for identification of inconsistencies and areas for improvement.

c. There should be regular trainings and round-table discussions on the Practice Directions to further expand the knowledge of the participants on culpability and harm categories, aggravating and mitigating factors, and the prescribed sentencing ranges. This will promote consistent and fair sentencing verdicts.

d. Enforcement of ancillary orders such as compensation, restitution, and rehabilitation should be enhanced to support victims and the affected communities.

e. Introduction of public awareness campaign and programs to educate the general public on sentencing principles, non-custodial sentence and the role of these guidelines in achieving the broader goals of justice reform and societal safety.

Conclusion

The Sentencing Directions represent a significant milestone in the criminal justice reform. By articulating clear standards, structured judicial discretion, and restorative alternatives, the Directions deepen fairness, transparency, and predictability in sentencing. It introduces procedures that narrow sentencing disparities, promote evidence based judicial reasoning and strengthen public confidence in the justice system. Thus, the visionary stewardship of the Chief Judge of Gombe State, along with the diligence of the Committee that drafted the Directions, deserves commendation for championing this legal framework which apparently will enhance justice delivery in the State.