DAKUKU VS WIKE: Todays Tribunal UPDATES

*Morning…. As the tribunal resumes sitting today All lead SAN’s are seated exchanging. pleasantries.

*Clerk presents proceedings

*Petition Number POT/RV/14/2015

*Petitioner Lead – Chief Akin Olujimi
*1st respondent – Obinna Onye Esq
*2nd respondent – Okey Wali SAN
*3rd respondent – Chief Chris Uche SAN

*Judge speaking: Petitioner filed an application on the 1st Respondent to give them leave to inspect, scan & allow biometric experts to report findings to the tribunal

==> Judge reads what transpired at the last proceedings

**First application is overtaken by event that the application of the petitioner has been granted in the first place hence the need to strike out this application – Judge (i.e. That the order or orders being sought by the Petitioner had already been granted before now alongside the order on inspection of the materials, therefore that the Petitioner already has its order to do all that and did not need to seek such order or orders again. On the strength of this, struck out the application)

*3rd respondent: My lord we thank you for the short ruling

**The first ruling of 15/6/2015 subsists so said the Judge

*Petitioner: Thank you for the ruling Sir

**The Judge asks if there is any question in view of the ruling?

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

*3rd respondent – Except we streamline the number of witnesses, document to present

*Petitioner – I was the first to be called on 14/8/2015 to adopt for pre hearing my lord

**Judge – In the absence of any question to stop the question and answer, we regulate all proceedings prior to this

*Petitioner – We can come on Thursday

**You said you have 1032 witnesses the Judge asks the petitioner

*Petitioner – We will reduce our witnesses

**Judge – My learned brothers said let us talk of time.

*Olujimi SAN says when it comes to star witnesses he would like to vary

*2nd respondent – Before we agree on star witness how many witnesses do we have he asks?

*Judge – Justice is not a one way traffic

*Petitioner – Ordinary witness 5mins, star witnesses 35mins. Re-examination my lord should be 5mins, supinning witnesses and depose will save time my lord and then documents certified can be tendered from the bar. Petitioner will select and mark exhibits.

* 2nd respondent – When they present documents certified or whatsoever we will respond

*3rd respondent – If they can take witnesses one by one

*Petitioner – We propose that for purpose of marking exhibits two persons will be nominated from respondents, then registry staff will direct and assign numbering of exhibits. For now, we would like to rely on filed issues

**Judge – 2nd and 3rd has not filed issues for witnesses

*1st respondent – We listed 1374 witnesses, We will cut down to 400 my lord it is also subjected to how many petitioners. My lord I don’t understand star witnesses, do star witnesses include experts? If so we ask for 1 hr for cross Examination, no problem with 5mins for ordinary and Re-examination but if my lord decides otherwise so be it. For ordinary witness we propose 30mins for cross examination, Re-examination 5mins. Marking of exhibits we are okay with the Petitioner however we want separate representation of respondent in marking exhibits. That’s all my lord.

*2nd Respondent: We have 777 witnesses, we wish to stick to 10days It is an appeal my lord. 35mins for star witnesses is okay, 30mins for normal witnesses my lord. For cross examination, I adopt the deposition of the 1st respondent. I don’t understand the process of marking exhibits as it is the whole sacred job of the registry. It is not now we can start marking exhibits you will get the copy of issues to determine.

*3rd respondent: For witnesses we have 700 to match petitioners witnesses, we will cut down to 200 but we plead for 10days, 5 mins for regular witness, 5 mins for Re-examination, Star witnesses 35mins and Cross examination 1hr. For normal witnesses cross examination, I plead for 30mins; I wish to go with 2nd Respondent in respect of marking exhibits.

*1st Respondent – Issues for determination would be filed today, we apologise for not filing long time ago.

*Petitioner – In regards to the proposal of witnesses from respondents in respect to cross examination I propose 10mins. In regard to star witness I suggest 30mins, all the witnesses have been deposed.

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

**Judge – we will give our view

*3rd Respondent – Supinning witness should be left to when it is necessary.

*Petitioner – To add to that, so we don’t come and argue unnecessarily that’s why we ask for supinning.

*3rd Respondent – There are conditions for supinning, that is why we are opposing it, Let that proposal not find the endorsement of the tribunal.

*2nd Respondent – I urge you not to take supinning of witnesses

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

**Judge – We will distribute the report of the tribunal tomorrow. Hearing will commence 3/09/2015

***Court adjourned.

Culled From Rivers Tribunal