A runaway trolley is heading toward five people, and you alone can decide what happens next. This entry in the Socratic series explores the famous Trolley Problem and the uncomfortable questions it raises about morality, responsibility, law, and whether human life can ever be reduced to arithmetic.

Most people walk into a police station and begin speaking long before they understand their rights. This practical guide explains what to say, what not to say, and how the Police Act 2020 protects suspects during arrest, questioning, and detention in Nigeria.

“You have the right to remain silent” is often treated as a line from American movies, but the principle exists firmly within Nigerian law. This article explains the legal basis of the right to remain silent, how it operates during police encounters, and why understanding it can fundamentally change the way citizens engage with authority.

A stabbing victim refused a lifesaving blood transfusion because of her religious beliefs, and the man who attacked her argued that her decision, not his actions, caused her death. This Casefiles entry explores R v Blaue (1975) and the criminal law principles of causation, responsibility, and the “thin skull rule.”

A son poisoned his mother intending to kill her, only for the court to discover she died from something entirely different. This Casefiles entry explores R v White (1910) and the criminal law principle of causation, asking whether bad intentions alone are enough for murder.

Can mercy coexist with justice without weakening it? Using the controversial clemency granted to Maryam Sanda as a starting point, this piece examines the constitutional power of pardon in Nigeria and explores the tension between compassion, accountability, victims’ rights, and public confidence in the justice system.

Can a person legally consent to being harmed? This Casefiles entry examines R v Brown (1993), the controversial English criminal law case that tested the limits of consent, bodily autonomy, and the state’s role in regulating private conduct.

A bizarre airport confrontation involving Fuji icon K1 the Ultimate quickly became more than a celebrity story. This piece examines the legal, constitutional, and aviation safety issues surrounding the incident, asking where accountability begins when public conduct collides with public risk.

Stranded at sea with no food or water, two sailors killed and ate a cabin boy to survive. In this #Casefiles entry, Mide Alabi examines R v Dudley & Stephens (1884), the infamous English case that tested the limits of morality, survival, and the defense of necessity in criminal law.

A pair of 18th-century highway robbers went to court over an unfair split of stolen loot and accidentally helped shape one of the most enduring principles in contract law. In this first #casefiles entry, Mide Alabi revisits Everet v. Williams (1725), the bizarre English case that established why courts refuse to enforce illegal agreements and why that principle still matters today.