Emmanuel Ogebe, counsel to Sunday Jackson the farmer who was convicted after acting in self-defence and later released has described the matter as more than a self-defence case, characterising it as a deeply flawed prosecution.
Ogebe stated this on Thursday, the 8th of January, 2026, during an interview on Prime Time, a programme aired on Arise Television.
“We need to understand that it was not just a classic self-defense case but it was a terrible prosecution case.
“Jackson was charged with 2 stabs, but the judgement said it was 3, and the Supreme Court said 3 stabs were excessive.
“The argument of the court was that yes it was self-defense but too many stabs. If they had accepted what was on the charge sheet that it was two stabs, he would have gone home free.
“Then we had the paramount ruler of his tribe and he got Jackson’s father and the deceased’s father to come together and the deceased’s father signed a letter for pardon. So, that and the outcry of Nigerians really helped.
“In a country where the US has just come to help us fight terrorism, we are trying to kill a citizen who helped what was clearly a deadly attack on himself, and so, everyone could see that this was unjust,” the lawyer said.
READ ALSO: Insecurity: Zamfara govt directs residents to obtain guns for self-defense
He explained that inconsistencies between the charge sheet and the judgement were central to the case, noting that the acceptance of two stab wounds as originally charged would have resulted in Jackson’s acquittal.
Ogebe also highlighted the role of traditional mediation, stating that the intervention of the community’s paramount ruler, coupled with the deceased’s family granting a pardon, contributed significantly to Jackson’s eventual release.
According to him, widespread public outrage further exposed the injustice of the case, reinforcing the argument that Jackson acted to defend himself against a life-threatening attack.