An Abuja High Court will on April 30 rule on whether to recall a prosecution witness, Mr Ayuba Ede, an assistant Commissioner of Police, in the alleged Apo six killings.
The Attorney General of the Federation sued Danjuma Ibrahim, a Deputy Commissioner of Police, Othman Abdulsalami, an Assistant Superintendent of Police, at large, Nicholas Zachariah, Emmanuel Baba, Emmanuel Acheneje and Sadiq Salami; all constables for the alleged killing.
They were alleged to have murdered Ifeanyi Ozo, Chinedu Meniru, Isaac Ekene, Paulinus Ogbonna, Anthony Nwokike and Tina Arebun, aged between 21 and 25.
Justice Ishaq Bello fixed the date after the prosecutor, Chief Chris Uche (SAN) and
Mr Rickey Tarfa (SAN) Counsel to first accused, adopted their written address on Ede’s recalled.
At the resumed hearing, Uche urged the court to recall Ede, an investigation officer, to tender exhibits recovered in the course of investigation.
He said that it was proper to recall Ede in court to give further evidence based on the provisions of Section 237 of the Criminal Procedure Code.
Uche argued that the court might at the stage of any inquiry, trial or other judicial proceedings, order a recall of any witness, where necessary.
“Under the law, the court can summon a person as a witness or recall him/her, if his evidence appears to the court to be essential to the just determination of the case, the court can order a recall of that witness to re-testify,” Uche said.
In his submissions, Tarfa, the Counsel to Danjuma, challenged the recall of Ede as a witness in the case.
He said that on Feb. 14, 2012, Ede was cross examined by him.
“At that sitting, the prosecutor informed the court that he will not be re-examining the witness and the witness was accordingly discharged.
“My lord it pertinent to state that the prosecution, thereafter, sought for several adjournments to enable them to field other witness in support of their case, but they failed to do so,” Tarfa said.
He said that when Ede was called, the prosecution led him in evidence and tendered two large brown parcels which were admitted in evidence and marked as exhibit 12, and 12A, respectively.
He argued that upon unveiling the parcels, an AK47 rifle and magazine were allegedly found.
Tarfa, therefore, urged the court to determine whether Ede or any other prosecution witness, who had testified and discharged, could be recalled at the whims of the prosecution.
“Can a witness be recalled without proper application and without placing sufficient materials before the court to consider in exercising its discretion as to whether or not to allow the recall of such a witness,” he said.
He, therefore, urged the court to discountenance the prayer of the prosecution to recall Ede as witness.
Bello adjourned the case to April 30 for ruling on whether to recall Ede as prosecution witness. (NAN)