Court Refuse Application To Tender Additional Document By Chief Atseleghe's Counsel

By Simeon OSAJIE

A Benin High Court, Criminal Court 4, has refused to grant Chief Johnson Atseleghe's counsel application to tender additional document (judgment) delivered at the High Court Warri by Chief Johnson Atseleghe and 11 Others' Defense Counsel to back up their defense during the cross examination of PW1, (first witness) against the alleged conspiracy, kidnapping and murder of Sunny Etchie, the Okhaigele of Kolokolo Community. The court  refused to admit the said document.

The Defendants' offence contravened Sections 516, 327 and 316 (1) punishable under Section 319 (1) of the Criminal Code Act , Cap C38, Laws of Federation of Nigeria 2004 and Section 2 (2) punishable under Section 3 of the Kidnapping Prohibition (Amendment) Law, 2013 of Edo State.

Also, the non availability of original or true certified copies of statements of the Principal Witness  PWI,  Mr. Benson Ayokotie  course the  Presiding Judge, Hon. Justice Ohimai Ovbiagele to adjourned the case for hearing.

The state counsel told the court that she had made several efforts for the transfer of the original copies of the document from Abuja to Benin City, but all efforts yielded no fruit, and thereafter agreed to satisfy the photocopies as proof of evidence before the adjournment date. 

The presiding judge asked the state counsel if she will be dispose to getting them satisfy before a given date, the state counsel responded in affirmative and the judge thereafter adjourned the case to 17th of February, 2021 to enable the state counsel satisfy the proof of evidence.

Speaking to newsmen after sitting, head of the legal team to Sunny Etchie's family Barr. Matthew Edaghese said that  the case is not Abuja case, there is no such thing either in the Police Act or in the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.

"This is not Abuja case, there is no such thing either in the Police Act or the Constitution of our country or under the Criminal Jurisprudent were a case that is handle  by a State Command should be taken to Abuja for vetting.

"Abuja is not a clearing house for case that has been investigated by the State, this is not Abuja case, the murder did not take place at Abuja Territory, this is a Federation, every State Command has the power to prosecute, even the Divisional Police Office have the power to prosecute, so, this is not a special case that will require any special law that is not known to our Legal Jurisprudent.

Going further, Barr. Edaghese emphasized, "IGP does not run round the country making arrest. he operate through the command and this command have the power, procedural power to arrest, investigate and prosecute, they don't need the approval or clearance from Abuja to prosecute a case they have investigate, a case that happen in their Territory within their Command, so, Abuja have no role or whatsoever to play.

"These are certain frivolous objections but because the Court is minded to do practical justice in the real sense of it in every sense of the world, otherwise this objection can be overrule, the law provides for this trial to continue with or without what they are demanding for, but to fulfill all righteousness, the court in his wisdom decided to obliged the defense counsel; it is not as if it is a strict department of the law, the extant provision of the law takes care of it."

On the allegation of continue harassment leveled against his clients by defense counsel, the head of the legal team to Sunny Etchie's family Barr. Matthew Edaghese said, "that was  very wide allegation that is baseless and unfounded by the defense counsel, is like a sinking stream man who has lost strength in the middle of the ocean looking for straw  to hold on to, he is holding unto the wave, sinking the wheel, wave will not save the sicking man, it will obviously facilitate the sink.

"So, l don't see any substance in that burgle allegation, he mentioned no name, he said community, community is not a name, he didn't mention any individual, he said the military, and the military is not control by our clients, l don't have a commander in chief of the armed forces before this court. neither do l have chief of army staff here as a client.  So, if they have any grievance against the army,  they should channel it to the appropriate  quarter - the military  not to me or my client," Barr. Edaghese opined.