By Uche Onyeali
Federal High Court in Abuja has fixed May 8 for ruling on the admissibility of a judgement of the Federal Capital Territory, FCT, High Court in suit number FCT/HC/CV/2574/2023, between Mr Ali Bello and Incorporated Trustees of American International School, Abuja, AISA.
The defence counsel, Joseph Daudu (SAN) had before proceeding on cross-examination of the third witness of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, EFCC, Nicholas Ohehomon, from AISA, sought to tender the document, which had decided on the issue of payment of fees or refund in the ongoing case instituted by the anti-graft commission against the immediate past governor of Kogi State, Yahaya Bello.
The defence counsel had also sought to tender the receipts of the recertification of the said documents.
But Kemi Pinherio (SAN), who had earlier examined the witness, objected, saying that the prosecution had not yet closed its case.
He argued that the defendant could not tender documents at a time the prosecution was still proving its case, citing Section 232 of the Evidence Act.
Reacting, Daudu said, “My lord, the admissibility of documents in criminal or civil cases is governed strictly and exclusively by the principles of relevance to the proceedings at hand.
“Once it is adjudged we submit that the document is relevant, it becomes automatically admissible. That is what is contained in Sections 4, 5 and 6 of the Evidence Act, 2011.
“The question for your lordship is, is this document relevant and admissible in line with Section 4? The answer has been provided by my learned brother silk for the prosecution.
“He referred to the content of the judgment and read out a portion which says that a particular relief was refused and that the fee agreement was upheld in the same judgment.”
He said the public documents they sought to tender had AISA as a party and that, as far as the defendant was concerned, the witness was the sole witness of AISA in the matter.
The defence counsel added that the objection of the prosecution was speculative because “he does not know what we want to do with the record yet.
“Because he (Pinhero) is not comfortable with the document does not stop its admissibility,” he added.
Pinherio, however, urged the court to reject the document, arguing that the defence counsel had not demonstrated that it comes within the ambit of Section 232 of the Evidence Act.
Justice Emeka Nwite, therefore, held that a date would be given for ruling on the admissibility of the FCT High Court judgment.
He adjourned the case to May 8 and 9 for ruling on the admissibility and continuation of trial.
Earlier when trial resumed yesterday, Pinheiro asked the registrar to give the witness Exhibit 13P1.
The witness identified the exhibit as a telex from the bank sent to the school via email by Ali Bello.
The witness was also told to identify Exhibits 13P2 to 13P4 and she confirmed that they were transfers made by Forza Oil and Gas in favour of the respective children.
He identified Exhibit 13P5, a telex by Whales Oil and Gas, to American International School as well as others.
During examination, the EFCC counsel asked the witness to tell the court in whose names four of the payment receipts were issued.
He said they were issued in the names of four children of the former governor, after being prompted by the prosecution counsel.
But the defence counsel cut in, saying that the witness should read the names on the receipt.
“My lord, he (Pinhero) is demonstrating this document. The witness cannot import or infer into the exhibit what is not there,” he stated.
Meanwhile, the defence counsel could not proceed with his cross-examination because the judge had to adjourn for ruling on the admissibility of an earlier judgement of the FCT High Court on the issue of payments of school fees.
