13/05/2026
The Federal High Court has just sentenced former Minister of Power, Saleh Mamman, to a total of 75 years imprisonment over money laundering and fraud involving about ₦33.8 Billion
But beyond the headlines, many people do not actually understand what the judge meant when he said the sentences should run CONSECUTIVELY and WITHOUT the option of fine.
Let me break it down simply.
When a Court says a sentence will run CONSECUTIVELY, it means the convict will serve the prison terms one after the other.
For example:
5 years on Count 1,
10 years on Count 2,
15 years on Count 3,
If the sentences run consecutively, the years are added together.
So the convict serves:
5 + 10 + 15 years.
That is exactly why prison terms become extremely heavy in cases involving multiple criminal counts.
But if Justice James Omotosho had ordered the sentences to run CONCURRENTLY, it would mean all the prison terms run at the same time.
In that situation, the convict would only serve the highest single sentence among the counts.
So instead of serving 30 years in the example above, the person would only serve 15 years.
That is the major legal difference between consecutive and concurrent sentencing.
The Court also reportedly ruled that the sentence should run without the option of fine except on Count 4 where a ₦10 Million fine was allowed. Legally, that means the convict cannot simply pay money and walk away from prison on the other counts. The imprisonment must be served unless the judgment is overturned on appeal.
But another important thing people should understand is this
A judgment of the Federal High Court is NOT final.
Under the law, Saleh Mamman still has a constitutional right to challenge the judgment at the Court of Appeal and even up to the Supreme Court if he is dissatisfied with the decision. That is how the judicial system works.
Today’s judgment may be affirmed.
It may be reduced.
It may even be overturned entirely by an appellate court.
That is why every accused person remains entitled to the full protection of the law and the right of appeal.
One thing however remains constant. Public office does not place anybody above the law.
Ignorance of the law is no an excuse.
©️U.A. Mayos
