FORENSIC EVIDENCE AND LEGAL PROOF: BRIDGING THE GAP BETWEEN SCIENTIFIC VALIDITY AND JUDICIAL ADMISSIBILITY IN NIGERIA

Abstract

In the adjudication of modern criminal and civil disputes, forensic science plays an increasingly pivotal role in the construction and authentication of legal proof. However, in Nigeria, the evidentiary treatment of forensic material is plagued by systemic deficiencies ranging from poor infrastructural support and judicial illiteracy in scientific reasoning, to a fragmented legal framework governing admissibility. This article critically examines the conceptual and procedural tensions between scientific validity and legal admissibility within Nigerian jurisprudence. Drawing upon comparative insights from the United States’ Daubert standard and the United Kingdom’s empirical threshold for expert evidence, the article interrogates the adequacy of the Nigerian Evidence Act 2011, particularly Sections 68–71, in filtering pseudoscientific methods and ensuring reliability. Case law analysis reveals a troubling pattern of judicial deference to flawed or inadequately scrutinized forensic techniques, including DNA, ballistic, and digital evidence. The article further investigates institutional bottlenecks within the Nigeria Police Forensic Unit and the Nigeria Immigration/Customs cyber labs, highlighting gaps in chain of custody, expert qualification, and cross-examination practices. In closing, the article proposes a reform agenda grounded in scientific literacy for the judiciary, accreditation of forensic labs, and a stricter evidentiary gatekeeping model. By re-aligning legal proof with scientific rigor, Nigerian courts can improve evidential integrity, ensure procedural fairness, and strengthen public confidence in the justice system.