Lucky Obukohwo ReportingÂ
An Edo State High Court Sitting in Benin, has fined the state chairman of the All Progressive Congress (APC), Col David Imuse (rtd), N100,000, for failing to serve his statement of defence on the former Akwa Ibom INEC Resident Electoral Commissioner, Mike Igini, African Newspapers, publishers of the Nigerian Tribune Newspapers and The Sun Newspapers.
It would be recall that the claimant, Mike Igini, had dragged Imuse (1st defendant), African Newspapers of Nigeria PLC, publishers of the Nigerian Tribune titles and the Sun Publishing Ltd, publishers of the Sun titles, to court in a alleged libel suit.
The claimant in the suit marked B/555/2020 slammed the Edo State APC chairman with N5 billion aggravated damages from the alleged libelous publications against him.
However, there was an embarrassing twist of event during Thursday’s hearing as counsel to the 1st defendant, Austin Osarenkhoe, prayed the court for adjournment to enable his client open his defence, which he claimed he had filed, following Mike Igini’s closure of his case after calling his last witness (PW3), Chief Ugo Ewelaku to testify in the court.
This was vehemently opposed to by counsel to the former INEC REC Commissioner, Clement Onwuwuenor, SAN, who had through his oral application told the court that the 1st defendant had not filed any defence against the suit.
The senior learned silk maintained that his client had not been served of the 1st defendant’s statement of defence and wondered what Osarenkhoe want to defend in court.
He reminded the court that when the matter opened four years ago, the court had issued two different orders, asking the 1st defendant to file his defence to no avail and wondered where the issue of the claimed defence emanated from.
He, prayed the court to award N200,000 against the APC Chairman in favour of Igini for trying to ambush his client and disobedience to the court earlier orders.
Osarenkhoe, however, told the court that his client had filed his defence statement before the court, and when asked the date and proof of service on Igini, The Nigerian Tribune and The Sun Newspapers, he promised to check his records and get back to the court.
Justice Vestee Eboreime, ordered the court bailiff to search for the proof of service of Imuse’s defence statement from the court record, this is even as the judge maintained that she saw the said statement in her file on Thursday Morning.
Upon search, the court bailiff told the court that there was no evidence of proof of Imuse’s defence statement in the court record, a situation that amused the judge and wondered how the defence statement got “smuggled” into her file.
In her short ruling, Justice Eboreime awarded the sum of N100,000 against the 1st defendant in favour of Igini and ordered Imuse to take step to serve the claimant, 2nd and 3rd defendants his defence statement, this is even as the case was adjourned to February 8, 2024 for continuation of hearing.
Osarenkhoe, later apologised to the court and counsels to the claimant, 2nd and 3rd defendants, blaming his failure to serve the parties on oversight.
Speaking with journalists shortly after the court sitting, Onwuwuenor, expressed disappointment at the claim of counsel to the 1st defendant over the defence statement of Imuse.
“The statement of defence of the 1st defendant was snuggled into the court file without any evidence of proof of service on my client, 2nd and 3rd defendants.
“It is not a good thing that has happened. This came after the claimant has just closed his case”, he said.
Earlier, the PW3, Chief Ewelaku in his testimonies told the court that he watched the contentious media story on some national televisions where he drew the attention of the claimant to it .
Upon cross-examination by the 1st defendant’s counsel on whether he can identify exhibit ‘D’ (CD plate evidence containing the alleged libelous story aired by Channels Television), Ewelaku while answering in the affirmative, prayed the court to replay the video for him to be sure it contains the same content he has earlier watched.
However, there was another milddrama as the Exhibit ‘D’ which was earlier played before the court refused to play following a crack on the CD plate.
This prompted the court to grant the oral application of the claimant’s counsel, requesting to substitute the Exhibit ‘D’, after recording that the CD plate had been played on the court earlier in good condition.
Speaking with journalists after the court adjourned, the claimant, Igini, expressed disappointment at the development but hinted that he would not be dissuaded as his intention was to make the 1 defendant show the evidence he claimed to have when he made the libelous pronouncements against his person.
Igini added that having sacrificed much to uphold the integrity of his assignments while he held fort as a REC and other ways he fought to entrench decency in public service, he would not sit by and allow anyone to rob him off his earned reputation and good name.