President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s recent presidential pardon for 175 convicted individuals has once again raised serious questions about justice, morality, and the true purpose of the law.
While the spirit of clemency is anchored on compassion and the hope of rehabilitation, extending such mercy to those convicted of heinous crimes, like murder, deeply offends public conscience. Mercy must never become a reward for brutality.
The case of Maryam Sanda, convicted for the cold-blooded killing of her husband, Bilyamin Muhammad Bello, remains a striking example.
The gruesome case, which gripped the nation, involved allegations that Sanda fatally stabbed her husband after discovering a nude picture of another woman on his phone.
Justice Yusuf Halil of the Federal Capital Territory High Court had, in a detailed 2020 judgment, found Sanda guilty of deliberate and cold-blooded murder, describing her actions as “wicked” and devoid of any lawful justification.
The Court of Appeal later affirmed her death sentence, rejecting all 20 grounds of her appeal.
Her trial was exhaustive, the evidence overwhelming, and justice was served, not only for the deceased but also for society. To release individuals like her under the guise of presidential mercy undermines that justice and diminishes the pain of victims’ families.
The law exists to protect life and uphold order, not to comfort those who destroy it. When convicted killers are set free without clear justification, the message is dangerous: that crime may yet find compassion before accountability.
If the government must exercise the power of pardon, it should do so with utmost discretion, ensuring that clemency serves justice, not erodes it.
After all, if and when perpetrators of heinous crimes are let loose, what then is the essence of the law?
