From Tony Osauzo, Benin
Hearing in the five billion naira libel suit instituted by former Resident Electoral Commissioner of the National Electoral Commission (INEC) for Akwa Ibom State, Mike Igini, against the Edo State Chairman of the All Progressives Congress (APC), Col David Imuse (retd), continued Tuesday with a second witness testifying in the matter.
The Claimant, lgini, had earlier concluded giving evidence in the case, paving way for the witness, Ero Anthony, to commence his evidence on oath before Justice Vestee Eboreimen of the Edo State High Court.
Shortly after Igini’s lead Counsel, Clement Onwuenwunor, SAN, called the witness to the witness box and commenced examining him, Imuse’s Counsel, Austin Osarenkhoe, raised objection to his statement on oath, describing it as “documentary hearsay”, particularly paragraphs 5 to 10 of the statement on oath.
He argued that the source and the information of the facts deposed to in those paragraphs are not within the personal knowledge of the witness, adding “This is documentary hearsay and it’s not admissible”, even as he cited sections of the Evidence Act to back his submission.
But countering the objection, Onwuenwunor said it was strange and contradicted the sections of the Evidence Act cited by the 1st defendant’s Counsel.
He contended that there is a slight difference between ordinary affidavit and witness statement on oath, stressing that once a witness statement on oath is adopted it becomes the evidence of witness in court.
“The witness said he knows, that he never said from paragraphs 4-10 that anybody told him”, Onwuenwunor told the court, pointing out that the new rules of Edo State High Court, Order 33 rule 3 has intervened and done away with the old position of the law that was standing against Justice as cited by the 1st defendant’s Counsel.
Justice Eboreimen, after considering the objection and reply, ruled that the contentious statement on oath be allowed, that at judgment stage if is found that it ought not have been admitted, it will be expunged from court records.
The court therefore ordered a continuation of hearing of the matter with the witness continuing his evidence. It later adjourned the matter to March 23rd, 2023.
Speaking to journalists later, Igini’s lead Counsel, Clement Onwuenwunor, said the evidence of the second witness will help in establishing the case made against the 1st defendant.
He said the case would continue even as he did not foreclose out of court settlement of the matter.
On his part, the Claimant, Igini said he wants to clear his name with the case in which Col. Imuse made allegations against him.
He said Imuse is yet to file his defence in the suit, adding “Col. Imuse must come to court to prove those allegations.”