A CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF PRESUMPTION IN RELATION TO THE LAW OF EVIDENCE IN NIGERIA

ABSTRACT As a general and fundamental rule in the law of evidence, facts on which a court can base its decision in any proceedings must be proved to exist by evidence. Presumption is one of the exceptions to the rule that he who asserts must prove. Though not defined by the Evidence Act, presumptions simply connote an assumption that a fact exists, based on the known or proven existence of some other fact or group of facts. It could also be an inference as to the existence of one fact from the existence of some other fact founded upon previous experience of their connection. The statutory premise for presumption can be connected to Section 145 of the Evidence Act. The inherent concept of presumption, whether grounded in legal principles or factual circumstances, constitutes an autonomous evidentiary element that necessitates or permits inference from a specified set of facts until rebutted. This phenomenon holds significance across both Civil and Criminal domains, showcasing its versatile application. This inquiry aims to scrutinize the instances wherein presumptions become imperative for conviction, exploring the nuanced impact of diverse judicial and statutory authorities on their application. Within the ambit of this investigation, an in-depth analysis of judicial decisions will be undertaken, delving into myriad issues stemming from presumptions of law and presumptions of fact, with a keen focus on their legal ramifications. The central argument contends that presumption, as a pervasive and incontrovertible element, permeates virtually all legal systems. The resonance of presumption within the Nigerian legal framework remains undiminished, substantiated by the nuanced interpretation and influence exerted by the provisions of the Evidence Act and the Criminal and Penal Codes pertaining to presumptions, as elucidated by juridical pronouncements.