Right to Bail in Nigeria and the Question of Conflict between Constitutional Rights and Exercise of Discretion

The right of a defendant to be admitted to bail except when charged with a capital offence is predicated on the constitutional right of a defendant to be presumed innocent until the prosecution proves his guilt as well as on the exercise of discretion of the court faced with application for bail; thus, there is an interplay of constitutional right and exercise of discretion by the court. A defendant must first be entitled to bail as of right before the court can determine availing him the right subject to the terms of the bail which the court may prescribe. This points to the fact that a person who is entitled to bail could still be denied bail if the court in exercising its discretion decides to refuse bail. The fundamental questions raised by this scenario is whether the court can in its exercise of discretion in considering a bail application deny a defendant his constitutional right and whether the exercise of such discretion conflicts with the right to be presumed innocent? This paper; adopting the doctrinal methodology appraised judicial authorities on the guiding principles for grant of bail, the constitutional right of a defendant to be presumed innocent and the exercise of discretion to grant bail and found among other facts that the constitutional right of a defendant in a criminal litigation to be presumed innocent until the contrary is proved is not at large, exercise of discretion is too wide and admits of chances of being abused but that there is no conflict between the presumption of innocence and exercise discretion. The paper made useful suggestions for the regulation of exercise of discretion in granting or refusing application for bail, among which is the need to approach the issue of bail liberally.