Lawyer to Lagos: My client was not in your state when crime he was accused of took place
by Juliana Francis · The Eagle OnlineThe Chamber of A. G. Giwa-Amu has written an open letter to the Attorney-General and Lagos State Commissioner for Justice asking for a review of legal advice with Ref No: LJP/Hom/2024/119, stressing that his client is innocent of charges brought against him.
He insisted that his client was going to be convicted based on hearsay, adding that it was not a professional way of handling judicial matters.
Giwa-Amu stressed that it would be morally and fundamentally wrong for an innocent person to be punished.
According to him, his client, Abubakar Suleiman Mayaki, was not even in Lagos State or anywhere near the scene of the alleged crime on the fateful day the incident occurred.
He asked that the case in its entirety should be given another thorough examination.
The letter, which was dated September 30, 2024, was also copied to the office of the Director of Public Prosecution and the Chief Judge of Lagos State.
Also Read:
- BBNaija ‘No Loose Guard’ winner emerges, wins N60m, others
- Bamidele: How we lobbied other lawmakers to pass SWDC Bill
- Lawyer to Lagos: My client was not in your state when crime he was accused of took place
- Rivers electoral commission issues certificates of return to new LG chairmen
- Akwa Ibom LG Poll: PDP wins 30 LGs, APC one
According to the chamber, the legal advice charge number is MIK/E/80/24 – Commissioner Of Police V. Akande Ahmed Omogbemi & Anor.
The letter reads: “We act as Solicitors to Abubakar Suleiman Mayaki, 2nd Defendant in Charge No: MIK/E/80/24 (hereinafter referred to as “our client”) on whose instructions we write.
“We refer to your Legal Advice with Ref No: LJP/HOM/2024/119 and kindly apply for a review of the said Legal Advice on the following grounds:
“That from the facts of the case even at your disposal, there is no shred of evidence linking the Defendants with the offence alleged in your Charge No: MIK/E/80/24, particularly our Abubakar Suleiman Mayaki.
“We refer you to paragraph 4 of the Legal Opinion/Advice of the Nigeria Police Legal/Prosecution Section with Ref No: CB: 3514/X/LEG/FHQ/ABJ/VOL.48/23, signed by DCP OHIOZOBA O. EHIEDE, Psc (1), Commissioner of Police, Legal FHQ, Abuja. Attached and marked Annexure ‘A’ is a copy of the said Legal Advice/Opinion.
“That the video which your office described as a “dying declaration” is clearly of no probative value, as same contains absolute hearsay, contrary to Section 37 of the Evidence Act 2011 (as amended in 2023), as the deceased was heard in Yoruba language in the video saying ‘won ni Mayaki lo ko won wa be,’ when translated to English Language means ‘they said it was Mayaki that brought them to the place.’
“That the said video which your office relied upon to form its Legal Opinion, which your office described as a ‘dying declaration,’ clearly contains evidence of the deceased being tutored to implicate innocent persons. We recommend that your office revisit that video.
“That contrary to provisions of Section 84(1) and Section 84C(1) of the Evidence Act 2011 (as amended in 2023), the maker of the said video was never called to make a statement to the police during the investigation, neither did he authenticate same by any means whatsoever to clarify the golden rule of practice that only a maker of material can tender it to make it of probative value.
“That our client was not in Lagos State or anywhere near the scene of the alleged crime on the 1st of April 2024 or the 1st of May 2024, when the offences to which your Legal Advice relates were allegedly committed.
“Please see the statement of our client dated 1st July 2024, page B2. Attached and marked Annexure ‘B’ is a copy of the said Statement.
“We urge you to reconsider your Legal Advice and follow the judicial decision in Ede vs. Federal Republic of Nigeria [2001] F.W.L.R. pt. 81 pg. 1838 @ ratio 8, where the Court of Appeal laid it to rest that: ‘The defence of alibi whenever raised, is to show that an accused person was not at the scene of the crime when it was committed.’
“In Aliyu v. State [2007] All FWLR pt. 388 pg. 1125, the Court held: ‘If an accused person raises unequivocally the issue of alibi, that he was somewhere else other than the locus delicti at the time of the commission of the offence with which he is charged and gives some facts and circumstances of his whereabout, the prosecution is duty bound to investigate the alibi set up, to verify its truthfulness or otherwise.’
“Our client’s alibi was not investigated by the police and not considered in your Legal Advice with Ref No: LJP/HOM/2024/119. Attached and marked Annexure ‘C’ is a copy of your Legal Advice.
“We wish to further bring to your attention, our letter dated 9th September 2024, duly acknowledged by your office, where we drew your attention to the wilful removal and malicious concealment of the Police Legal Advice with Ref No: CB: 3514/X/LEG/FHQ/ABJ/VOL.48/23 from the case file forwarded to your office by the Homicide Section, Force Criminal Intelligence Department, Force Headquarters, Area 10, Abuja, with intention and in furtherance of a conspiracy to set up false allegations against our client.
“We urge your office, in the interest of justice, to take a second look at the said Legal Advice/Opinion for review of same. Kindly resolve the grey areas in favour of our client, in line with statutory provisions and judicial decisions. We anticipate your quick response in this regard.”
Post Views: 17