In a high-profile case that has captured public attention, the Lagos State High Court at Tafawa Balewa Square has reserved judgment in the trial of Andrew Ominikoron, a Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) driver accused of the rape and murder of 22-year-old fashion designer, Oluwabamise Ayanwole. The judgment is scheduled for May 2, 2025, following the adoption of final written addresses by both the prosecution and defense.
Background of the Case
On February 26, 2022, Oluwabamise Ayanwole boarded a BRT bus driven by Andrew Ominikoron along the Lekki-Ajah Expressway in Lagos. Tragically, she was later found dead, leading to public outrage and demands for justice. Ominikoron was subsequently arrested and charged with conspiracy, rape, and murder.
Defense’s Arguments
During the trial, defense counsel Abayomi Omotubora contended that the prosecution failed to provide sufficient evidence linking Ominikoron to Ayanwole’s death. He emphasized that none of the nine prosecution witnesses directly implicated the defendant. Omotubora also challenged the admissibility of a voice note sent by the deceased to her friend, labeling it as hearsay since the friend was not called to testify. Furthermore, he argued that the “last-seen” doctrine, which suggests that the person last seen with the deceased is responsible for their death, requires strong circumstantial evidence, which he claimed was lacking in this case. Additionally, Omotubora asserted that the testimony of a previous alleged rape victim of Ominikoron necessitated corroboration.
Prosecution’s Standpoint
Contrarily, the Director of Public Prosecutions, Dr. Babajide Martins, urged the court to convict Ominikoron based on the testimonies of key prosecution witnesses. He argued that under Nigerian law, corroboration is not mandatory in rape cases. Martins highlighted that Ominikoron was the last person seen with Ayanwole and that his subsequent flight to Ososa, Sagamu in Ogun State, instead of reporting to the police, was suspicious behavior. He also referenced Section 34 of the Nigerian Evidence Act, which allows the court to consider dying declarations, suggesting that the deceased’s voice note should be deemed admissible.
Defendant’s Testimony
In his defense, Ominikoron testified that he neither raped nor killed Ayanwole. He recounted that on the day of the incident, he was on an afternoon shift from Oshodi to Ajah and had completed a round trip before embarking on a second trip back to Ajah around 7 to 8 pm. He admitted to illegally picking up passengers, a practice colloquially known among drivers as “Korokpe.” Ominikoron claimed that after dropping off passengers at their respective destinations, he was left with only Ayanwole on the bus. He alleged that some individuals later boarded the bus and attacked both him and Ayanwole, leading to her abduction. He stated that fear prevented him from reporting the incident to the authorities.
Legal Considerations
The case brings to the forefront several legal principles, notably the “last-seen” doctrine and the admissibility of dying declarations. The “last-seen” doctrine posits that the person last seen with a deceased individual is presumed to have knowledge of the circumstances leading to their death, placing the burden on the defendant to provide an explanation. Regarding dying declarations, Section 34 of the Nigerian Evidence Act allows statements made by a person believing they are about to die to be admissible in court, provided certain conditions are met. The defense’s challenge to the admissibility of the voice note hinges on whether it meets these criteria.
Public Reaction and Family’s Accusations
The trial has attracted significant public interest, with many advocating for justice for Ayanwole. Her family has accused the Lagos State government of delays in the trial and failure to apprehend other suspects allegedly involved in the incident. They have expressed concerns over perceived attempts to cover up the circumstances surrounding Ayanwole’s death. These allegations have intensified calls from various quarters for a transparent and expedited judicial process.
Awaiting Judgment
As the court prepares to deliver its judgment on May 2, 2025, the case underscores critical issues related to public transportation safety, the responsibilities of service providers, and the imperative of ensuring justice for victims of violent crimes. The outcome is anticipated to have far-reaching implications for legal precedents concerning the “last-seen” doctrine and the admissibility of evidence in criminal proceedings.
Note: This article is based on information available up to March 7, 2025. Any developments occurring after this date are not reflected.
