Abstract
Rape remains a pervasive issue in Nigeria, with its prosecution often impeded by evidentiary challenges. Central to these challenges is the reliance on corroborative evidence, despite its controversial nature in criminal jurisprudence. This paper critically appraises the doctrine of uncorroborated evidence in rape cases under Nigerian law. The paper aimed to evaluate the legal framework and judicial approach to uncorroborated evidence, assessing its impact on victims’ access to justice and the broader implications for criminal accountability. Employing a doctrinal research method, the paper reviewed statutory provisions, judicial precedents, and scholarly literature to interrogate the evidentiary standards required for rape convictions. The findings revealed that while Nigerian courts no longer demand mandatory corroboration in rape cases, a pervasive judicial bias often disfavours uncorroborated testimonies from victims, leading to inconsistent application of the law. This approach not only undermines the credibility of victims but also perpetuates a culture of impunity for perpetrators. The paper therefore, recommended legislative reforms to codify the non-requirement of corroboration in rape cases explicitly and advocates for judicial training to mitigate biases. Further, it emphasised the need for comprehensive victim-support mechanisms, including access to forensic evidence and psychological counseling, to strengthen rape prosecutions and promote justice for survivors.