ALL THE DEFENDANTS’ NAMES NEED NOT BE LISTED IN A NOTICE OF APPEAL BUT THAT OF THE APPELLANT
F.R.N. v. Lamido (2026) 12 NWLR (Pt. 2054) 351 at 375—376, A per Umar JSC: ‘In criminal appeals, it is generally not mandatory for an appellant to include the names of co-accused at the trial court in his notice of appeal, if those co-accused are not affected by the appeal. The fundamental principle guiding criminal appeals is that an appeal is a challenge by an aggrieved party (the appellant) against a decision of a lower court that directly affects him. The notice of appeal serves to formally notify the appellate court and the respondent, typically the state or as in this case at the lower court, the Federal Republic of Nigeria, of the appellant’s intention to appeal and the specific grounds upon which the appeal is based, pertaining to his own conviction or sentence.The primary purpose of a notice of appeal is to identify the appellant, the respondent, the decision being appealed against, and the grounds of appeal. The focus is on the appellants grievance with the judgment of the lower court as it relates to his individual case. The Court of Appeal Rules generally outline the requirements for a notice of appeal, which center on the appellant and the judgment or decision affecting him.Therefore, it is utterly unnecessary for an appellant to endorse his co-accused as part of the parties to the appeal when the appeal is for himself only. The rules do not impose a mandate on a sole appellant to include his co-accused, this is because it implies that the lower court was being invited to determine the rights or involvement of other defendants in the appeal filed there at. Conversely, if a co-accused is not appealing, or has been acquitted, or their case is entirely distinct from the appellant’s grounds of appeal, there is no legal or procedural requirement to name them in the notice of appeal. Therefore, including unaffected parties would be superfluous and could potentially complicate the appeal process by introducing irrelevant details. I agree with the contention of learned counsel for the appellant that “all appeal shall be by way of rehearing,” however, a rehearing is distinct from a re-trial. The appeal is not a re-trial of all parties involved in the original case, but rather a review of the judgment as it pertains to the specific appellant and his challenge to the findings or sentence against him.’