Tribunal: How Lawyers To Tinubu & APC Rattled Peter Obi’s Witness

Posted on May 31, 2023

Yesterday, lawyers to President Bola Ahmed Tinubu, INEC and the All Progressives Congress rattled a witness of Peter Obi, the Labour Party candidate, when the witness faced cross examination at the Presidential Election Tribunal.

The lawyers bombarded the witness, identified as Lawrence Nwakaeti, with questions on whether the document he claimed contained an indictment of the president on drug accusation was registered in Nigeria or the U.S. consular office in Nigeria.

He was also asked whether he obtained a police certification of the document in the U.S. He replied no.

Nevertheless, the Presidential Election Petition Court, (PEPC), admitted the documents.

Lawyers to Tinubu, Kashim Shettima and the APC told the court that they opposed the documents, but said they would expatiate on their objection in their closing remarks.

The document tendered on Tuesday was a United States District Court judgment, which Peter Obi claimed indicted Tinubu, because it ordered his forfeiture of 460,000 dollars in a drug suspicion offence.

Nwakaeti, who was jokingly called a ‘moon witness instead of a star witness’, was led in evidence by Mr Jibrin Okutepa, SAN.

Nwakaeti told the court that he was a registered voter and that he voted at a polling unit in his hometown in Anambra on Feb. 25.

Counsel to the respondents raised objections to the admission of the document in evidence but reserved their arguments to their objections until the final address stage.

Under cross examination by counsel to Tinubu, Mr Wole Olanipekun, SAN, the witness admitted that the judgment was not registered in Nigeria.

Nwakaeti also admitted that there was no certificate from any Consular in Nigeria or America in support of the judgment but that the judgement was obtained and certified by the person in whose custody it was.

The witness told the court that he had been to the United States and also that he had read the judgment in its entirety adding that he would be surprised if no mention was made of 460,000 dollars forfeiture in it.

While also cross examining the witness, counsel to the All Progressives Congress, (APC), Mr Lateef Fagbemi, SAN, sought to know if the document had the certification of any police officer in the United States.

“Do you have a certificate given under the hand of a police officer in the United States where the alleged conviction took place.

“Are you aware of a formal clearance report dated Feb. 4, 2003 issued under the legal attache’ of the United States embassy in respect of the alleged indictment and forfeiture?”

The witness told the court that he had no certificate from the police and that he was not aware of any such report.

The witness further told the court that he did not have the charges against Tinubu because there were no charges since the indictment was from a civil forfeiture proceeding.

Since Nwakaeti was the petitioner’s only witness for the day, the Chairman of the Court, Justice Haruna Tsammani adjourned further hearing in the petition until Wednesday.

Full Transcript of Cross Examination:

LP: I apply that the witness be recalled to the witness box. Witness is listed as Number 7 LUNN in our petition

Court: Is he a star witness?

LP: No he’s a moon witness (joke). He’s an ordinary witness Where do you live?

W: Ihiala Anambra state

LP: On 20th of March 2023 you deposed to a witness statement to this honourable court. Please identify it.

W: I can identify my deposition

LP: What do you want to do with it.

W: Before I continue I wish to ask to apply to amend at paragraph 10. I mistakenly inserted 14th July (not February) 2022.

LP: My Lords I hope you effect this corrections before we progress. I so apply

Court: Any objections?

Respondents: No objections

Court: In the absence of any opposition it is hereby amended.

W: I seek to adopt same as my evidence

LP: In Para 17 of witness disposition you referred to the proceedings of the US district courts. Are these the documents you referred to then?

W: Yes they are

LP: I apply to tender that document which has been listed at number 5, pages 2 to the last of exhibit BA. Witness referred to it in paragraph 17 of his deposition.

Court: Objections?

INEC: No objection

T/S: Yes. I will put in the objection with arguments in our final Address

APC: I am objecting but I’ll do so in my final address.

Court: Admitted and marked as exhibit

T/s: His time is up.

LP: Please look at paragraph 7-11 of exh BA1 to BA4, are they the documents you referred to in your deposition?

W: Yes
LP: Thank you my Lord. I surrender him to cross examination

INEC: Witness, confirm to the court that you are a registered voter

W: I have my PVC and I voted on the 25th day of February, 2023

INEC: What’s your polling unit

W: Located in front of my house. Umuezala Village Square. That’s my polling unit

INEC: Will I be correct to say that you played no other role in the election

W: I’m a legal practitioner, not an author.

INEc: Confirm to the court if you have ever appeared to the Court of Appeal or Supreme Court as an Amicus on any constitutional matter

W: No

INEC: please confirm that your statements in Para 4, 15, 16 & 17 of your deposition are the legal opinion you have formed on the exhibit you have identified.

W: They are not my legal opinion but matters of pure law

INEC: You said you’re from Amoka Community. Confirm to the court that there was crises

LP: I object because there is nothing related to this in his deposition. The sky is not the limit for cross examination.

Court: INEC what are you driving at?

INEC: I want to establish that he is a serial at causing crises. It is relevant for injuring his credibility in this election. He caused the crisis such that they have two presidents in the elections

T/S: Good Day my Learned friend. Did you prepare the statement and reached the conclusion or it was prepared for you?

W: I vetted it myself and I did not draw conclusion but I stated facts

T/S: Have you been to US? When and where?

W: Been Once in 2003, in Michigan.

T/S: In para: 17 & 18 you stated emphatically that the 2nd respondent was fined 460k dollars in the US. Do you still stand by it?

W: Yes I do

T/S: I suggest to you that you have never read through exhibit P5 series

W: I read through the entire document.

T/S: Will it surprise you that it was never indicated that in this document you tendered that no word, paragraph, line and sentence referred to him being fined?

W: I will be surprised because he was fined & the document speaks for itself.

T/S: We argue that these documents are not registered in Nigeria. Are they?

W: No but allow me to explain

T/S: No certificate from either the consul of United States, you know that?

W: There are certificates

S: Is there a certificate issued by any consular in US or Nigeria?

W: No certificates from the consular

T/S: Lastly, you tendered exhibit P1-P4, judgement of the Supreme Court. It settles any matter, Is that right?

Court: Objection to that question?

W: No.

APC: Do you have in Exh PA5 series, a certificate given under the hand of a police officer in the area where this occurred in the US?

W: None from the police