Sentencing Disparities in Nigerian Criminal Courts: An Empirical Study of Outcomes in Drug Offence Cases

Sentencing consistency is a fundamental dimension of justice, requiring that similarly situated offenders receive comparable punishment in order to uphold principles of equality before the law. In Nigeria, the absence of structured sentencing guidelines for the superior courts creates conditions in which judicial discretion may produce significant disparities based on extralegal factors including offender demographics, legal representation quality, and geographical jurisdiction. This research conducts an empirical analysis of sentencing disparities in drug offence cases prosecuted before state and federal courts in Lagos, Kano, and Enugu between 2018 and 2024. A quantitative methodology was employed, coding sentencing outcomes from 320 decided drug offence cases and applying regression analysis to isolate the effects of legally relevant and extralegal variables on custodial sentence length and fine amounts. Secondary sources include National Drug Law Enforcement Agency prosecution reports, Federal High Court records, and sentencing disparity literature from comparative common law jurisdictions. The study develops an original quantitative sentencing analysis model adapted to the Nigerian judicial context. Findings reveal statistically significant disparities in sentencing outcomes attributable to offender gender, type of legal representation, and geographical court location, beyond what can be explained by differences in offence seriousness. The research contributes original empirical evidence to the sentencing law discourse and recommends the development of advisory sentencing guidelines by the National Judicial Council. Keywords: sentencing disparity, drug offences, empirical legal study, judicial discretion, Nigeria.