·
Tribunal declares witness hostile
·
You made a Dangerous Choice, INEC tells
Ogboru’s Counsel
Just as the Governorship Election
Petition Tribunal sitting in Asaba on Tuesday upheld the claim by Labour Party
(LP), and its governorship candidate in the April 11, 2015 election in Delta
State that the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) staff, Mr.
Felix Enabor, the witness they called is a hostile one, the witness during
cross examination affirmed that Governor Ifeanyi Okowa of the People’s
Democratic Party (PDP) duly won the election and was so declared by INEC.
He told the tribunal: “I did not make
exhibit P2 or P2A. I did not make any input, I did not tender the document. I
did not come with any ill-feeling towards anybody. I am a civil servant. I was
telling the truth. I was stating the official position of INEC. I have no
external dealings with all those said to have been arrested in connection with
the stolen INEC result sheets.”
He affirmed that the result of the
governorship election was declared and Senator (Dr.) Ifeanyi Okowa of PDP was
declared winner having polled the majority of votes. Enabor said: “It is
correct that I do not work in INEC’s ICT headquarters. It is correct that some
of the data captured in the card reader were not uploaded before the directive
to shut down the server. Accreditation was done in accordance with the
instruction and in accordance with the Electoral Act. The election was not
cancelled because of irregularities.”
Mr. Enahor was answering questions
under cross examination in the petition filed by the LP and Chief Great
Ovedje Ogboru, its gubernatorial candidate in the just concluded
governorship election in Delta State, challenging the election victory of Dr.
Ifeanyi Okowa at the polls.
Giving his ruling earlier, Chairman
of the tribunal, Justice Nasiru Gunmi, held that the star witness of the
Labour Party and Chief Ogboru has not only suddenly abandoned them,
but that he has turned hostile.
Counsel to LP and Ogboru , Mr.
Robert Emukpoeruo had informed the tribunal that certain portions in
paragraphs 5,6, and 7 of their witness, Mr. Felix Enabor’s
statement on oath contained depositions that are “animus and
hostile” to the petitioners.
The motion elicited strong objections
and counter objections from counsels to both parties to the dispute.
In his ruling, Justice Gunmi upheld the
position of the petitioners, saying: “We have carefully examined the deposition
of pw2 and we are of the view that some of the paragraphs in the said
deposition stand against the pleading of the petitioners, we therefore agree
with the petitioner’s counsel that it was right to treat pw2 as a hostile
witness for the purpose of being cross examined by the petitioners’ counsel”.
Soon after the court declared Enabor as
a hostile witness, Justice Gunmi asked Ogboru’s counsel, Mr.
Dele Adesina (SAN) to proceed with his cross examination, where
Enabor responded to questions saying that the governorship
election conducted by INEC in Delta state was done in compliance with the
Electoral Acts .
Enabor, under examination by the
counsels for Okowa, PDP and INEC, Mr. Ken Mozie (SAN), Timothy Kehinde(SAN) and
Dr. Onyechi Ikpeazu (SAN) respectively also affirmed that he was
not the maker of the documents that were tendered in court but that he came
only to tender them.
He also said that he did not come to
court with ill feelings as he was a civil servant, adding that paragraph five
of the deposition he made in court over the stolen INEC document and the arrest
of some persons in connection with the criminal act was based on police
investigation and report, saying that he has no animosity against those
arrested.
He said he stood by the averments made
in the depositions in his statement to the tribunal on oath, adding that Governor
Ifeanyi Okowa is the duly elected candidate in the
governorship election of Delta State having polled the highest votes .
Enabor also told the tribunal
that, some of the data captured in the card reader were not captured in
the field before the server was shut dawn.
Attempt by Ogboru’s counsel to subject
the witness to another round of cross examination after the court declared him
hostile elicited another round of argument as respondents’ counsels vehemently
opposed the move.
According to Adesina, the subpoenaed
order on the witness has not been vacated by the tribunal, adding that there
are some documents that the witness needed to tender before the tribunal.
Chief Ken Mozie (SAN) strongly opposed
the motion arguing “the argument is grossly mischievous. He has been cross
examined, he has deposed to his statement, and the subpoena was issued on
the application of the Petitioners. I submit that there is no provision
of the law for disjointed presentation of evidence. I submit that he can no longer
give evidence and should be allowed to go”.
Chief Akinlolu Timothy Kehinde (SAN),
for PDP in his opposition submitted that “the witness cannot come back to give
evidence in chief because there is no provision in our justice system that
evidence should be done in bits as he did not apply to make the witness present
or tender his document before declaring him hostile.”
Kehinde argued further, that the petitioner
can bring any document through other witness, pointing out that in the
circumstance they have found themselves, they either sink or swim with the
witness
Ikpeazu, on his part, while aligning with
the submissions of the first and second respondents’ counsels, argued that the
witness has told the tribunal that all the documents needed had been
produced.
He informed the court that the prosecution
made a very serious and dangerous choice to the effect that they would
rather treat the witness as hostile witness. He said the move is tantamount
to abandonment of a friendly witness, pointing out that if they have
to tender any document it has to come through another witness. The petitioners
had made a wrong choice, Ikpeazu said.
Ruling on the matter, Justice Gunmi
disallowed the moves by the petitioners to compel the witness to tender further
document or keep him any longer as witness as they have declared him a hostile
witness
He adjourned further hearing on the
matter to Monday, September 7, 2015.
No comments:
Post a Comment