By Sar Terver
More than six years after the tragic death of 13-year-old Elizabeth Ochanya Ogbaje, public anger is rising again amidst hindrances.
A recent wake of agitation by civil society organizations and even politicians like the Senator representing Kogi West, Natasha Akpoti, Esq., through social media posts has revived calls for the government to revisit the rape case that collapsed in court, with many Nigerians questioning whether the justice system failed the young schoolgirl whose story once shocked the nation.
But according to a highly placed legal officer in the Benue State Ministry of Justice who spoke on condition of anonymity, the growing calls, though emotionally understandable, qare legally complicated, and in their current form, cannot trigger a reopening of the matter.
The case, he explains, did not collapse because the court declared the accused innocent. Instead, it fell apart because prosecutors could not meet the “strict evidentiary standards” required to secure a conviction for rape under Nigerian law.
“The judge never said the act did not happen,” he stressed. “He said the prosecution failed to prove the essential ingredients of the offence beyond reasonable doubt.”
At the time, the prosecution presented medical reports, statements, and witness accounts, but the court found critical loopholes.
A video that many activists believed would strengthen the case was not admitted because it lacked proper authentication. “People talked about a video, but it was never verified,” the senior lawyer said. “The court cannot rely on evidence that does not meet the legal threshold.”
Apart from evidentiary shortcomings, he pointed to deeper issues: social media pressure, disjointed police investigation, and the rush to satisfy public emotions.
“Social media interference affected the case. Some activists were more interested in visibility and noise. But noise cannot replace evidence. Emotional campaigns do not win cases”, he said
Another legal practitioner who also pleaded anonymity disclosed that police investigations were incomplete at the time the file was forwarded to the court, largely because the online pressure to “do something immediately” forced institutions to act hastily.
“Social media pressure pushes police to conclude investigations too quickly. A rape case is technical; you need expert testimony, medical analysis, and proper documentation. When you hurry, you miss important details’, he argued.
Rumours have further inflamed public sentiment. In recent weeks, social media users claimed that the young man once accused in the case had resurfaced in Lagos to launch a music album, causing demands that the authorities should “go after him again.” But the lawyer described the uproar as another example of uninformed activism.
“The claim started online. Nobody confirmed it with the police. The police said no one even contacted them before the story went viral.”
He added that the alleged “sighting” of the suspect was actually posted by his sister. Instead of quietly informing the police to act, the information was broadcast widely, giving the suspect time to flee. “These social media pre-emptions of lawful processes are hampering investigations,” he said.
With the renewed calls to revisit the case, many are asking whether the Ministry of Justice intends to take any steps, especially since public confidence in the system is at stake.
“But legally, the Ministry cannot act simply because of online pressure or trending hashtags. The Ministry cannot just ‘reopen’ a case because people are angry. There must be a formal application and new, credible evidence. Not emotions, not rumours, evidence”, the lawyer argued.
Such evidence could include new medical findings, fresh witness testimony, previously unavailable documents, or any substantial material strong enough to support filing new charges. “Without new evidence, the Ministry cannot do anything. That is the law,” he maintained.
He said he would still need to consult the Attorney-General before giving any official position on behalf of the Ministry. “Once I get the official brief, I will share the Ministry’s stance,” he assured.
But for now, the pathway to reviving the case remains narrow and uncertain. The legal officer insists that justice must be pursued through due process, not through agitation alone. “We feel for the death of Ochanya”, he said..
“Everyone does,” he said quietly. “But the law requires proof. When the law criminalizes an offence, it also sets the standards for proving that offence. If you cannot meet those standards, the court cannot convict. That is how justice works”.
For families seeking closure, activists demanding accountability, and a public longing for justice, this may not be the answer they hope to hear.
Still, the lawyer believes journalists must help the public understand the true situation. “You should avoid publishing claims you cannot back up,” he told our reporter. “Just report your findings. Facts, not emotions.”
Until new evidence emerges and due process is activated, the fate of any attempt to reopen the case hangs delicately, caught between the weight of public grief and the uncompromising demands of the law.
of what impact ?