Justice M.B. Idris of the Federal High Court sitting in Ikoyi, Lagos, on Thursday, May 4, 2017, admitted as exhibits the confessional statements of a former Chief of Air Staff, Air Marshall Adesola Amosun(retd.) and two serving senior officers of the Nigeria Air Force, NAF- Air Vice Marshal Jacob Bola Adigun and Air Commodore Gbadebo Owodunni Olugbenga- tendered by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, EFCC.
The defendants alongside eight companies are standing trial over an alleged case of conspiracy, stealing, money laundering and conversion of funds belonging to the Nigeria Air Force.
At the last adjourned sitting on Wednesday, May 3, 2017, the defence had objected to the admissibility of the statements on the grounds that the prosecution witness, Tosin Owobo, an operative of the EFCC, did not state categorically that he took the statements of the defendants.
The defence had also urged the court not to admit the documents in evidence on the grounds that the statements were not duly certified.
However, Justice Idris, in his ruling today, held that the documents sought to be tendered by the prosecution were original and could be tendered by anyone since they were duly certified.
While ruling on the argument by the defence that a team rather than the prosecution witness took the defendants' statements, the judge said: "When the witness used the word "we", he was referring to himself and either one person or more. This prosecution witness can tender the statements since he witnessed it.
"This documents are, therefore, admissible and marked as exhibits."
Justice Idris also ruled that a trial within trial would only be necessary, where the defendants denied making the statements.
" But it is not the fact of the case at hand, " the judge added.
Rotimi Oyedepo, the prosecution counsel, further sought to tender the statement of account and account opening package of Solomon Enterprises as well as St. Solomon Healthcare, the first defendant's companies that allegedly received certain funds from one of the NAF accounts.
However, Bolaji Ayorinde , SAN, counsel to the first defendant, objected on the grounds that one of the documents sought to be tendered was not in the proof of evidence given to him.
According to him, "The document dated 18th April, 2016 and 7th March, 2016 is in the additional proof of evidence given to us, but the one dated 5th March, 2016 is missing from it.
"This document is materially and substantially different from what was purportedly front-loaded. So, under the law, the classification has to be that this document sought to be tendered has not been front-loaded.
"It is my submission that the defect in the attachment is a virus. The entire document is as good as not being front-loaded. So, the prosecution should tender the document, but it should be rejected by my Lord."
Counsels to the other defendants
aligned with Ayorinde's submission.
In response, Oyedepo said the additional proof of evidence given to the defence contained the letter dated April 18, 2016 and March 7, 2016, adding that it reflected in its form as front-loaded to the defence.
Oyedepo, therefore, urged the court to accept the letters that were given to the defence.
He also sought the leave of the court to front-load the letter dated March 5, 2016 and not mark same as rejected.
"The documents are certified true copies in line with your Lordship's ruling and serves no evidential defect.
"In view of the demand of the defence that the letter dated March 5, 2016 is not given to them, in the interest of justice, we are prepared to front-load the documents to them.
"The document is relevant to the fact in issue and I will urge your Lordship not to accede to the request of the defence to reject the document.'
Justice Idris adjourned the matter to Friday, May 5, 2017 for ruling.
No comments: