The presiding Judge, Justice
Gabriel Kolawole at the Federal High Court, Abuja, has stopped witness from using chart to offer explanation at the ongoing case between the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) versus Nigeria’s former Head of Service, Mr. Stephen Oronsaye, Osarenkhoe Afe, and three others, reports ITRealms.
Ruling in favour of the defence team against an attempt by the
Commission’s first prosecution witness (Pw1), Rouqayya Ibrahim to use a chart
to give her evidence, the judge said, the witness, an operative of the Economic and Financial
Crimes Commission, who came as the Commission’s first Prosecution Witness on the request to use a Chart in the Court to explain the findings of the EFCC in
the course of investigation of the alleged fraud in Pension payments in
Nigeria.
Opposing the request, lead Counsel to Mr. Stephen Oronsaye,
Mr. Kanu Agabi (SAN), argued that the chart, as displayed, having photographs
of the accused persons will not allow for fair trial.
“The chart, having photographs of the
accused persons will be prejudicial and will not allow for fair trial. When I
saw the chart, I thought it was a document earlier frontloaded to us, but we
just noticed that we received it here in Court. If it is a document they intend
to use, they should serve it on us properly,” he said.
Adding his voice, Counsel to the second and third
defendants, Mr. Oluwole Aladoyele described the practise as strange to his
team, arguing that it does not conform to the provisions of the Evidence Act,
relying on Section 239 of the Act.
He urged the Court to disallow what he described as a
strange procedure, further describing the information on the chart as the
personal opinion of the prosecution witness.
Canvassing in favour of the use of the Chart, Prosecution
Counsel, Mr. Adebisi Adeniye argued that the opposition to the Chart was
misconceived.
“I submit that the opposition to the usage of the chat is
misconceived. It is not a situation where we hope to tender the document in
evidence. What the witness has said is that she has a chat with which she can
demonstrate the investigation she carried out and her findings. Even under the
evidence Act, this witness can refresh her memory.”
In his ruling, the presiding Judge, Justice Gabriel Kolawole
upheld the arguments of the two defence counsels, disallowing the use of the
demonstration chart.
‘‘If the chart will not be tendered as an exhibit, of what
use is it? If I merely have to listen to the PW1’s explanations, of what use is
it when the judgement will be written? If the use of the chart is merely to
demonstrate how the fraud was perpetrated and not tendered as an exhibit, it
will not be useful in judgement. I agree with the view of the counsel to the
2nd and 3rd defendants that the chart will be prejudicial. PW1 has not shown
any sign of one with loss of memory. She appears to be clever and clearheaded.
It is also important that the defendants are accorded fair hearing and fair
trial. It is either the Chart is tendered as an exhibit or is out rightly
discarded. My decision is to disallow this, which the PW1 introduced by herself
without guidance by the prosecution Counsel. The Chart is disallowed from being
demonstrated to the Court.”
Similarly, an attempt made by the same prosecution Counsel
to pray the Court to accept a Statement made by the second defendant as an
exhibit was also blocked by the defence Counsel, who argued that the said
statement made in the office of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission
was written under duress. He made a case for a ‘trial-within- trial’, a prayer
that was granted by the presiding Judge.
‘‘I object to the admissibility of this document. It was
made through oppression, using the exact words of the Evidence Act. I am particular
about the statements made on the 24th of February, 2011 and 16th of March,
2011. They were made through oppression, as he was threatened, induced and
harassed to make the statements and we intend to demonstrate this if my lord
graciously orders trial within trial to demonstrate to you that these documents
are inadmissible. He was bundled,‘‘ he stressed.
Delivering his ruling on the admissibility of the document,
presiding Judge, Justice Gabriel Kolawole said ‘‘In view of the objection
raised by the second and third defence Counsel, and relying on sections 28 and
29 o*f the Evidence Act, we will take a mini procedure, a trial within trial."
The matter was adjourned to 21st of June, 2016 for the
ordered mini procedure.
It would be recalled that the Economic and Financial Crimes
Commission dragged Nigeria’s former head of Service, Mr. Stephen Oronsaye and
four others before Justice Gabriel Kolawole of a Federal High Court, Abuja over
an amended 35-count charge bordering on alleged corruption.
Others charged by the Commission are: Cluster Logistics
Limited, Kangolo Dynamic Cleaning Limited, and Drew Investment &
Construction Company Limited. Osarenkhoe Afe is the managing director of
Fredrick Hamilton Global Services Limited.
Meanwhile, many well-meaning Nigerians have cautioned the
Federal Government over what they described as the persecution of Nigeria’s
former Head of Service by the EFCC, further describing it as a show of
ingratitude to one who introduced reforms to the country’s Civil Service and exposed
corruption in the system.
No comments:
Post a Comment