By Asiwaju Kunle Kalejaye, SAN, Chairman, Eagle102.5 FM Ilese-Ijebu
Nigeria’s proposed Suicide Prevention Bill has reignited debate over whether people who survive suicide attempts should face criminal prosecution or receive medical and psychological support.
Sponsored by Senator Asuquo Ekpenyong, the bill reportedly scaled its second reading in the Nigerian Senate on October 13, 2026. It seeks to decriminalise attempted suicide by repealing Section 327 of the Criminal Code Act and Section 231 of the Penal Code, provisions that currently expose survivors to imprisonment.
The proposed reform represents an opportunity to reconsider Nigeria’s approach to suicide prevention, mental health care and the protection of fundamental human rights.
At its core is a fundamental question: when a citizen reaches a point of severe psychological distress and attempts to end their life, should the state’s response be arrest and imprisonment or medical intervention and rehabilitation?
Senate Debate Raises Questions About Deterrence
During the debate, Senate President Godswill Akpabio reportedly opposed the proposed decriminalisation, expressing concern that removing criminal penalties could encourage suicide attempts.
He was also quoted as saying: “If you attempt suicide, make sure you die. Anyone who attempts and fails will go to jail.”
The reported remark has drawn attention to the tension between criminal deterrence and the need to treat suicide attempts as potential medical emergencies. The accuracy and full context of the quotation should be established from the official Senate record.
Akpabio was also reported to have argued that any changes to the existing legal framework must involve state Houses of Assembly.
While the argument for deterrence is based on the need to preserve human life, advocates of decriminalisation contend that threatening a person in severe psychological distress with imprisonment may not prevent a suicide attempt.
Instead, criminalisation can discourage survivors and their families from seeking medical assistance for fear of prosecution and social stigma.
A more effective approach, they argue, would prioritise timely intervention, psychological assessment, counselling and access to appropriate mental health services.
Economic Hardship and the Mental Health Crisis
The debate over decriminalisation cannot be separated from the socioeconomic challenges confronting many Nigerians.
Rising living costs, inflation, unemployment and widespread financial insecurity have placed enormous pressure on households, raising concerns about the impact of economic hardship on mental well-being.
For people experiencing severe psychological distress, financial difficulties may compound existing mental health challenges and feelings of hopelessness.
Criminalising those who survive suicide attempts risks adding another layer of punishment to an already difficult situation.
From this perspective, the law should distinguish between a person experiencing a mental health crisis and an individual who deliberately encourages or assists another person to die.
The state also has an important responsibility to strengthen access to mental health care, provide social support and address the conditions that contribute to psychological distress.
Although economic hardship does not affect everyone in the same way, its potential consequences for mental health make compassionate and accessible support particularly important.
Does Criminalisation Conflict With the Constitution?
The constitutional argument for decriminalisation centres on the fundamental rights guaranteed under Chapter IV of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, as amended.
Section 34 guarantees the right to dignity of the human person and prohibits torture and inhuman or degrading treatment.
Advocates of reform argue that arresting, prosecuting or imprisoning a person who has survived a suicide attempt may compound the person’s distress and undermine the dignity that the Constitution seeks to protect.
However, whether the existing provisions are unconstitutional is a legal question that requires careful examination of the relevant laws, judicial decisions and constitutional principles.
Section 45 of the Constitution permits certain restrictions on specified rights in defined circumstances, including those relating to public safety, public order, public morality and public health.
The scope of these limitations must be considered in their proper constitutional context. The existence of a public health concern does not, by itself, settle whether criminal punishment is a necessary or proportionate response.
Supporters of decriminalisation maintain that suicide prevention is better served by medical intervention than by imprisonment.
Their argument is that a person who has survived a suicide attempt should have access to emergency care, professional assessment and continuing support rather than automatically being treated as a criminal offender.
Kenya’s Landmark Ruling Offers a Regional Example
Nigeria can draw lessons from developments in other African countries that have reconsidered the criminalisation of attempted suicide.
In January 2025, Kenya’s High Court struck down provisions criminalising attempted suicide, in a landmark decision concerning mental health, constitutional rights and human dignity.
Justice Lawrence Mugambi ruled against the criminalisation of attempted suicide, addressing concerns about the treatment of people experiencing mental health crises and the discriminatory effects of punitive laws.
The decision followed a legal challenge involving mental health advocates, including Charity Muturi, who had campaigned for people experiencing mental health difficulties to receive care without the additional burden of criminal prosecution.
Muturi and other advocates argued that decriminalisation was necessary to encourage people experiencing psychological distress to seek help without fear of arrest.
Tragically, Muturi reportedly died by suicide two months before the landmark ruling, underscoring the urgent need for accessible and effective mental health support.
Kenya’s experience illustrates how constitutional litigation can become a mechanism for challenging laws inherited from the colonial period.
It also demonstrates that changing the law is only one part of suicide prevention; accessible treatment, public education and sustained support remain essential.
Ghana Replaces Imprisonment With a Mental Health Approach
Ghana has also reformed its legal framework on attempted suicide.
Under the country’s former legal provisions, attempted suicide was treated as a criminal offence, exposing survivors to prosecution and possible imprisonment.
The framework included Section 57(2) of the Criminal Offences Act, 1960 (Act 29), which classified attempted suicide as a misdemeanour.
Critics argued that the law failed to adequately recognise the mental health challenges that may underlie suicide attempts and could discourage vulnerable people from seeking assistance.
In 2023, Ghana passed the Criminal Offences (Amendment) Act, decriminalising attempted suicide and moving away from imprisonment as the primary legal response.
The reform marked a shift towards treating suicide attempts as a public health and mental health concern rather than simply a criminal matter.
However, questions have also arisen about how survivors should be described and supported under the country’s mental health framework.
Labelling every survivor as having a severe mental disorder risks creating a different form of stigma, particularly where an individual’s circumstances and clinical needs have not been properly assessed.
Nigeria’s lawmakers can learn from Ghana’s experience by ensuring that any new legislation promotes treatment and support without automatically assigning a psychiatric diagnosis to every survivor.
What Nigeria’s Suicide Prevention Bill Should Address
As the proposed legislation progresses through the Senate, lawmakers have an opportunity to develop a framework that protects life while respecting human dignity.
First, the bill should establish a clear pathway for referring survivors to appropriate medical and psychological services.
Second, it should encourage families and members of the public to seek emergency assistance without fear that reporting a suicide attempt will automatically expose the survivor to criminal prosecution.
Third, lawmakers should carefully consider whether criminal penalties should remain for third parties who intentionally assist, encourage or facilitate suicide, taking account of the relevant offences and safeguards under Nigerian law.
Any such provisions must be clearly drafted to distinguish deliberate assistance in suicide from legitimate medical care, compassionate support and the provision of emergency assistance.
Fourth, the legislation should support public education, professional training and stronger access to mental health services, including counselling and follow-up care.
Finally, the constitutional responsibilities of the National Assembly and state legislatures must be carefully considered when drafting and implementing reforms affecting the Criminal Code, Penal Code and other relevant laws.
Addressing these issues would help ensure that decriminalisation forms part of a broader suicide prevention strategy rather than remaining an isolated legal amendment.
Decriminalisation Is Not an Endorsement of Suicide
The argument for decriminalisation is not an argument in favour of self-harm. It is an argument about how the state should respond when a person survives a potentially fatal crisis.
Supporters of reform believe that criminal punishment can deepen the suffering of vulnerable people, discourage help-seeking and place additional pressure on families already coping with an emergency.
The alternative is a system that prioritises emergency medical attention, professional assessment, counselling, rehabilitation and long-term support.
Nigeria’s lawmakers must also consider the practical implications of reform, including the availability of treatment facilities, trained mental health professionals and reliable referral services.
The experiences of Kenya and Ghana offer useful lessons, but Nigeria must develop a framework that reflects its own constitutional arrangements, legal institutions and public health needs.
As the Suicide Prevention Bill advances, the central challenge is to protect human life without unnecessarily criminalising people who may need urgent medical attention.
A person who survives a suicide attempt needs care, compassion and appropriate professional support. The law should be designed to protect life, preserve human dignity and make it easier—not harder—for vulnerable people to seek help.
Tags: Nigeria Suicide Prevention Bill, Asuquo Ekpenyong, Godswill Akpabio, Suicide Decriminalisation, Mental Health Nigeria, Nigerian Senate, Human Rights, Nigerian Constitution, Kenya Suicide Law, Ghana Mental Health Reform
