THE INJUSTICE AGAINST MARYAM SANDA SENTENCE

Before you crucified me, permit me to bare my mind on the recent sentence to death of Maryam Sanda who was convicted some weeks ago for murdering her husband. The law, they say, is no respected of person, and so it should be. 

Granted, no one should kill another man for whatever reason. Even in self defense, it has to be proven beyond any reasonable doubt, before any death can be justifiable, not even when there is probability that Sanda's husband did not commit the offence for which life was sniffed out of him. To all intent and purposes, on the surface, his killing was needless, coldless and heartless in the face of morality and law. 

And that is all about it. Let me say here that Sanda sentence to death was needless too and may amount to injustice. While she has had her days in court as any reasonable lawyer should preach and demand, the truth is, her sentence to death may amount to injustice in the long run if closely looked into. Thank God, she has appealed the case, and I do hope favour will be her luck this time. 

Her conviction is based on incontrovertible evidence according to the judge. Thus, to all intent and purposes, she actually committed the crime. However, the law appears not to have given her fair hearing on the following grounds:

1. How many of us know the number of times Sandra has been emotionally murdered by her husband through infidelity, and of which she has countless being suffering in silence? How many? I know the usual argument is that she should have quitted, but I say, this is easier said than done because issues of the heart are delicate matters which is hardly a straight forward matter. Besides, we are in a society, where divorce is often frowned at by members of the society, so considering the social stigma, what if Sanda has decided to stay put in the marriage. How about she holding on to the marriage because of her children, believing the husband will change for the better? 

2. How many of us knows if Sandra has intended to use the bottle as self defense, only for things to go out of hands? Anger is like a bomb, once diffuse, it can hardly be curtailed. What if her husband has repeatedly beaten her up on that day before she retaliated, which unfortunately resulted in the death of the husband? 

Many spouses have suffered in silence before they retaliated, and of which their retaliations become the one that people are seen because of its far-reaching effects. As it is with men, so it is with women. 

3. The law was not just to Sandra because it failed to see her as coparent of the children of the diseased, and of which her absence will create more harms than good. Are we thinking of what will become the lots of the children who are about to lost two parents when they can hardly know whom those parents are? Are we considering the future impact of the death of the two parents on the children? What narrative are they going to be told about their parents- the children of parents who died because of infidelity? What's the social stigma on them? 

I'm not the judge, neither God, but I think Maryam Sandra deserves to be given a second chance. One, to learn from her mistakes. Two, to give those children a chance to be trained by at least one of their biological parents. I may be wrong, but this is my own opinion. I do hope she gets reprieve at the Appeal Court! 

Happy Weekend!

God bless You!!

God bless Nigeria!!!