Before adjournment on Thursday, the Federal High Court, Uyo had adopted as exhibits the Certified True Copies of West African Examination Council certificates belonging to Pastor Umo Bassey Eno, the Akwa Ibom Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) governorship candidate during the 2023 elections.
Mr. Irogberachi Ihejirika, a senior assistant registrar with the Uyo Office of the West African Examinations Council appearing as DW2 in the witness box and had tendered documents as exhibits.
Barrister Emmanuel Essien, a representative of Akwa Ibom Attorney-General and Commissioner for Justice also presented another certificate belonging to Eno.
Read also
- Okon raises alarm over alleged attempt by Eno’s lawyers to swap certificate
- Umo Eno tenders certificates in court, disowns confirmation of result
- Alleged forgery case: Umo Eno Parades 17, Akan Okon, six lawyers
The certificates were Certified True Copies of WAEC (GCE) of June 1981 of Bassey Umo Eno, admitted as D5 by the court and WAEC (GCE) ordinary level of Dec 1983 belonging to Eno Umo Bassey admitted as D6 by the court.
Recall that a letter dated August 8, 2022, was addressed to the criminal intelligence and investigations department of the Nigerian Police Force tendered as Exhibit D7 before the court.
The letter dated September 5, 2022 was addressed to the criminal intelligence and investigations department of the Nigerian Police Force, Uyo, “Re Investigation of activities CSP Chris, is admitted by the court as Exhibit D8.
Straightnews gathered that Umo Eno in an amended response to the Writ of Summon by Akan Okon on Monday, September 12, 2022, disowned and withdrew the WAEC confirmation slip in court.
During the cross-examination of the plaintiff on Monday, September 13, 2020, the defendant’s lawyers also opposed the demand by Akan Okon to produce the confirmation of the result letter, but came to produce the document in court Thursday.
The decision to own up the confirmation of the result slip was seen as a failed attempt by Mr. Eno’s legal team to substitute the paginated certificate tendered in court.
It was learned that they had initially applied for a subpoena for the 2nd defendant, Pastor Umo Eno, and two others, however, because they want to shield their witnesses from cross-examination they are now pleading with the court to allow the witnesses to present written testimony instead of appearing in person.
Okon’s lead counsel, Mr. Okey Amaechi (SAN) objected to the application of Pastor Umo Eno, insisting that the Registrar cannot substitute what was earlier subpoenaed.
He argued that if they want to change the format of their defence, they should apply afresh to the court.
The argument on the point dragged on for about two hours.
The defence counsel pleaded that the Court should stand down the cross-examination for 30 minutes which the court granted.
At the resumed sitting after the 30 minutes’ break, the court ruled that the WAEC officer, Mr. Noble Ihiejirika, who is a Senior Assistant Registrar cannot be cross-examined, a decision which did not go well with the plaintiff’s lawyer.
The defence lawyers led by Nwoko had drawn the court’s attention to the Evidence Act, Section 219 which attributes a statement by a witness, as null and void, if the said statement had not been admitted by the witness in court.
Amaechi argued that if the WAEC witness had tendered the document from the floor of the court without entering the witness box, he would have been excused, but to have entered the witness box, and sworn to an affidavit, he ought to be cross-examined.
Apart from the police witness who was prepared to be cross-examined, all the other witnesses listed by the Umo Eno legal team evaded cross-examination.
Nwoko, counsel to the 1st two defendants reminded Amaechi that the witness was in court by a summon, Subpoena Ducetecum and could not be subjected to cross examination, saying a party is entitled to choose how it presents its case.
While Paul Usoro apologized for the mix-up, Okon’s lawyer rejected the application which led to heated legal arguments.
Though the court is awaiting ruling on the arguments, it has been adjourned to Tuesday, September 20, 2022.
