When news broke on Wednesday that President Bola Tinubu’s administration had revoked the pardon initially granted to convicted murderer Maryam Sanda, many Nigerians heaved a sigh of relief.
The presidency’s decision to replace her full pardon with a commutation of sentence — from death by hanging to 12 years’ imprisonment — was a crucial correction in a controversy that had threatened public faith in the justice system.
EDITOR’S PICKS
Sanda’s name first appeared on a list of 175 convicts granted clemency following the approval of the National Council of State on October 9, 2025.
The list, released by Attorney-General Lateef Fagbemi, included people convicted of serious offences such as murder, drug trafficking, and arms dealing. Public outrage was immediate and intense, with many questioning the moral and legal grounds for extending mercy to those whose crimes involved deliberate loss of life.
At the centre of the storm was Maryam Sanda the woman convicted in 2020 for killing her husband, Bilyaminu Bello, during a domestic dispute in 2017.
Her death sentence, upheld by both the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court, had symbolised accountability for gender-based homicide and premeditated violence. The inclusion of her name in the clemency list appeared to erase that justice overnight.
Listening to Outrage
The backlash was swift and unrelenting. Families of victims, rights advocates, and ordinary citizens flooded social media and news platforms with anger, describing the pardon as “a mockery of justice.” Many felt it set a dangerous precedent; that with the right connections or pleas for compassion, even the gravest crimes could be forgiven.
To its credit, the presidency listened to public sentiment and swiftly reversed course. On Wednesday, a revised gazette was issued: Sanda’s death sentence would no longer be erased, but commuted to a 12-year term on what officials described as “compassionate grounds” for her two children and “good conduct” in prison.
The number of clemency beneficiaries was also reduced from 175 to 34, with directives for stricter review and oversight in future exercises.
This decision matters. It signals that public accountability still has weight in governance, and that even presidential powers of mercy must not be wielded carelessly. More importantly, it reassures victims’ families and the broader public that justice cannot be rewritten quietly behind closed doors.
Mercy with Boundaries
While critics may still question the commutation, seeing 12 years as insufficient punishment for a heinous and premeditated crime, it is nonetheless a far better outcome than a total release.
Sanda has already spent six years and eight months in custody, and will now serve roughly five more. That may not fully satisfy those demanding the ultimate penalty, but it at least preserves the principle that actions have consequences.
Presidential clemency is meant to temper justice with mercy, not to dilute accountability or trivialise the pain of victims. The government’s reversal, therefore, reflects a delicate but necessary balance between compassion and consequence.
FURTHER READING
By revisiting and correcting its own decision, the Tinubu administration has done the right thing, not just legally, but morally and politically. The revocation of Maryam Sanda’s pardon is a reminder that mercy must always be measured, and that no one, no matter how remorseful, should simply get away with murder.
Philip Ibitoye is a Special Correspondent with EKO HOT BLOG. Click here to find daily analysis and critical insight on trending issues in Lagos and other parts of Nigeria.
Click here to watch the video of the week below:
