Mark, a former Senate President, was returned winner of the Benue South Senatorial election held in April by the INEC, having defeated his only rival, Daniel Onjeh of the APC. At the resumed sitting, Mr Yakubu Nachamada, one of the witnesses from INEC identified five documents which Onjeh sought to tender but the PDP Counsel, Chris Alechenu, objected the admissibility of one of them.
Alechenu premised his rejection on the grounds that the document did not originate from the party seeking to tender. The document in contention is a letter dated July 27, 2015 authorising INEC staff to be witness in the suit. The PDP counsel averred that the letter could only be tendered in evidence either through the INEC Chairman, the Resident Electoral Commissioner or the author of the letter, insisting that the witness was neither of them.
He said “the witness is not the author and the addressee is not even copied the letter, so, the letter cannot be tendered through him; it is not even an authorisation for the witness to testify in the matter. In his arguments, Mr Kenneth Ikoni, Counsel to Mark, agreed with the views of the PDP counsel and urged the court to reject the admissibility of the letter.
Onjeh’s counsel, Tunji Oso, however, urged the court to discountenance the objections raised by the respondents’ counsel, saying that the document was relevant and sufficient to link the witness to the evidence relating to his relevance in court. Citing the Nigerian Weekly Law Report page 17 (G-H) he averred that “a document linking a witness to an evidence can be tendered with or without the consent of the author or addressee.’’
The Chairman of the tribunal, Justice Mosumola Dipeolu, ruled that the document was very vital as to the appearance of the witness in court. Dipeolu, therefore, overruled the objections of the two counsel and admitted the document into evidence as exhibit PA. The Card Reader Accreditation Data in respect of the election for all the polling units in the senatorial district generated from INEC website and presented in court by Nachamada were admitted in evidence.
Another exhibit admitted in evidence was the receipt for certification of documents, however, the court refused another application by Oso to tender the subpoena by the Tribunal for the two witnesses from INEC to testify in court. Earlier, PDP counsel had urged the court to reject the admissibility of the order on the grounds that it was already the document of the court, stressing that the court had no need for it in evidence.
The tribunal chairman then agreed with the respondents’ counsel and rejected the admissibility of the subpoena order in evidence.
Meanwhile, the case had been adjourned until July 30, for continuation of trial.
No comments:
Post a Comment
The comments on TCB does not represent the view of the author and we are not responsible for any comment you see on this page