The mock trial was the 2nd and final stage the competition. It would be recalled that in moot stage of the competition the 500level constituency emerged as winners against the 400level constituency.
The mock trial which had three of the Staff members of the Faculty as Judges lasted for two days, the 26th and 27th of January. The Judges were Barr. (Mrs) Elizabeth Iyamu-Ojo, Barr (Mrs) Juliet Aimienrovbiye and Barr. (Mrs) Aigbe.
 |
| The judges, Mrs Aigbe, Barr. Iyamu-Ojo, Barr. Juliet. |
The summary of the brief concerned the arrest of one Obinna Okereke and Freeman Ajah. Who had been charged with Murder & Assault, and Rape respectively.
 |
| Clerk for the proceedings. Bolere. |
The trial started at about 2:30pm at L.T I which had a capacity crowd from all levels, many of which had never seen a mock trial before and wanted to have an experience, others wanting to cheer their respective classes.
 |
| Accused Persons. (400level) |
Witnesses for 500level.
Prosecution Counsels from the 500level Constituency were Bakare. J and Collins. A, while Defence Counsels from the 400level Constituency were Okonkwo. V and Adefowale. M.
 |
| Counsels for 500level. From R-L, Arikor.C, Bakare.J. |
The counsels for 400level. From R-L, Okonkwo.V, and Adefolawe. M.
Things kicked off in earnest with the Counsels showing interest in the charge, the clerk reading the charges to the accused persons and the accused persons pleading not guilty.
There was a phenomenal display of creativity and terrific role playing from the participants when it was time for examination of witnesses as the 500level team members took on the roles of Taiwo Adeniyi, the first accused (Obinna's) neighbour, Dr Iko Williams a Forensic Pathologist and Detective Ogbonna, who by reason of examination by the prosecution and cross examination by the defence gave evidence in court. The prosecution team produced certificates and documents showing the authenticity and expertise of the witnesses and also produced exhibits to aid their case, which included a blood stained shirt and a knife which the first accused allegedly committed the crime with.
The trial was however adjourned to the next day because it was already past 5pm at the time the prosecution closed their case
Trial resumed 1:30pm the next day with the defence presenting their case. It was another show of stupendous role playing technique as two members of 400level team took on the roles of Obinna Okereke, the first accused who was on trial for murder and assault, and Freeman Ajah, the second accused who was charged with the crime of rape. They were examined and cross examined by defence and prosecution counsels.
The well experienced Judges did not fail to detect and subsequently correct flaws in the proceedings of both counsels.
It was time for counsels to make submissions. Defence Counsel Okonkwo Vincent in his submission stated while treating the issue of assault stated that the possibility of accident is not foreign to legal parlance at all, relying on Section 24 of the Criminal Code Act of Nigeria and argued that the first accused was not guilty of murder.
On the second issue which bordered on whether sexual intercourse can be translated rape, learned counsel relying on Section 357 of the CCA submitted that it can never be heard that a person is held criminal liable for rape where there was consent, that the element for rape is the lack of consent.
The third issue raised by the defence was whether provocation could be a defence as to assault. It was submitted with allusion to Section 284 of the CCA that provocation is a defence to a charge of assault. Learned counsel asserted that the Law is not insensitive to the fact that humans are carriers of emotion and that the 1st accused acted in the heat of passion and could rely on the defence of provocation.
Making their submission, prosecution counsels brought it to the attention of the court that the Criminal Law of Lagos state is what they would rely on as prescribed by the organisers. On the issue of whether the 1st accused murdered the deceased, prosecution relying on section 220 Criminal Law of Lagos state, stated that the ingredients of murder includes the death of the deceased and that the death resulted from the actions of the accused whether accidental or not. And thus the 1st accused was guilty of murder.
On whether the accused can be guilty of assault occasioning harm, learned counsels for the prosecution argued that the accused could not possibly rely on the defence of provocation because he was not the one being assaulted in the first place and thus had no reason to react. Also, it was submitted that the mode of retaliation due to provocation must be commensurate to the act of provocation and not occasion death or grievous bodily harm to the other person, which happened in the present case and lead to grievous bodily harm. The learned relied on Section 189 CLL.
On whether the 2nd accused did rape the deceased, the prosecution submitted that for the crime of rape to be committed, there must have been sex, penetration and lack of consent. The prosecution stated that the 2nd accused was guilty of rape and appealed to the court to do Justice which was for the corporate existence of society and also set a deterrent for "ravenous wolves in the clothing of men.
At the end of the various submissions, the court went on recess which last for almost 50 minutes as the learned Judges put their judgements and observations together.
In the leading judgement delivered by Barr. (Mrs) Iyamu-Ojo, the court convicted the 1st accused of the offence of assault. But found him not guilty of murder and the 2nd accused was found not guilty of rape.
Acknowledging that this was a competition, Barr Iyamu-Ojo commended the counsels and the team members from both team for a job well done and hoped they had learnt even more from the experience.
She said they had been accessed based on appearance, application of law to facts in issue, advocacy, diction and team work. She observed that in certain areas the defence did well, and in other areas the prosecution did well also. Citing instances of examination and cross examination where the defence did very well; and application of law to facts where the prosecution did brilliantly. She however noted the amateurism and lack of experience of both sides and decided that opinions and corrections will be given to them personally, for the sake of time.
However in the final scoring as announced by the judges, 400level constituency scored 54 points, while 500level constituency had 48 points.
 |
| Members of the Victorious 400level constituency. |
REACTIONS.
After the ruling, ULP sought to get Counsels' opinion on the whole exercise.
ULP: You just achieved what could be regarded as a 'Landmark' victory over the 500level constituency. What do you have to say based on that fact?
Okonkwo Vincent: Well it was an exhilarating victory and a deserved one too. We worked hard for it and we deserved to get it, so I am just happy everything panned out as planned.
ULP: in the moot stage, there were talks of bias and partiality of the judges. But the fact that in this stage we had external judges, in fact our experienced lecturers, do you think that acted in your favour?
Okonkwo Vincent: if anything acted in our favour it was our ability to apply the law effectively to our case. So we did what was right and the law went in our favour. In fact I do not think it was just the judges that had the opinion that we were better off, anybody in the court would have agreed that we deserved to win. So it was a general consensus. The Judges only agreed in tandem with what everyone else felt.
ULP: Has this competition improved you in any way?
Okonkwo Vincent: of course, everything is a step towards a higher purpose. This was my first mock criminal trial, I have been in a mock civil trial before, so I have learnt from the actual process itself. Now I know one or two things about appearing in court in a criminal trial.
ULP: The Chief Judge, Barr. (Mrs) Iyamu-Ojo, repeatedly corrected counsels and seemingly interrupted them, and at times it seemed like she was asking the witnesses questions Do you think she descended into the arena of conflict too often?
Okonkwo Vincent: We have to realise that this was a competition and not an actual case. Her attempts, although a bit exuberant, she acted excitedly, but it was deserved because we needed to have been taught some few things. It would have been completely wrong if she had not mentioned our faults to us. So the fact that she once in a while spoke to us directly actually helped to serve (one of) the purpose of the competition.
ULP: You just achieved what could be regarded as a 'Landmark' victory over the 500level constituency. What do you have to say based on that fact?
Mark: We did our very best, we prepared very well. It was a worthy competition and we had worthy opponents, the fight was vicious but it was fair to an extent. Though it seemed at the moot stage that we would not come out successful, but thank God for Justice, we thank God that we had external Judges who were fair. Indeed worthy opponents but the better team had to win.
ULP: In the moot stage, there were talks of bias and partiality of the judges. But the fact that in this stage we had external judges, in fact our experienced lecturers, do you think that acted in your favour?
Mark: The use of external Judges this time is premised on the fact that the current Judges in the Jural court are no so abreast with mock trial activities in the Faculty, because none had ever presided over one. So based on advice from the general public, we arrived at using external Judges.
ULP: The Chief Judge, Barr. (Mrs) Iyamu-Ojo, repeatedly corrected counsels and seemingly interrupted them, and at times it seemed like she was asking the witnesses questions Do you think she descended into the arena of conflict too often?
Mark: Well it was a mock competition and also an area of learning, but you are not in real life suit. You should realise that this is our first time of appearing in a mock competition. So it was not 'delving', it was more of a tutorial and she did it to counsels on both sides.
ULP: Knowledge gained?
Mark: Yes, as a matter of fact when it comes to matters to procedure. From the so-called 'delving' of the Judges, we learnt a lot about procedure.
Tami Koroye - LAWBA Chairman
ULP: We have witnessed a mock trial for the first time after a very long period of absence in the Faculty, as Chairman of Law Students Bar Association (LAWBA) you put this together. What are your comments to that effect?
Tami Koroye: The reason why mock trials have not been conducted in the Faculty for a very long time is the fact that it is time consuming and it is more expensive. But with contributions from both 500 and 400level, we were able to pull this through. All thanks go to the two classes, without them it would not have been possible.
ULP: there were talks of bias at the moot stage, but at the mock trial there were external judges, well experienced in the Legal practice. As an unbiased and on-the-fence spectator, do you think the use of external Judges influenced the results the results in anyway?
Tami Koroye: First of all, concerning the moot sitting, I do not think there was any bias because it was evenly matched and there was a declared winner. For the mock the reason why we brought external Judges was not because of the fact that we did not have sitting Judges or because there was going to be a likelihood of bias; it was because of the fact that our present Judges are a little bit ill-experienced in mock proceedings so we needed someone who had experience overtime. That is the major reason why we brought external Judges. So I do not think there was any bias from the moot stage that affected or rubbed off on the mock stage for the winners to emerge.
ULP: The Chief Judge, Barr. (Mrs) Iyamu-Ojo, repeatedly corrected counsels and seemingly interrupted them, and at times it seemed like she was asking the witnesses questions Do you think she descended into the arena of conflict too often?
Tami Koroye: Yeah she did dive, I am not going to deny that she dived into the arena of the court. But its due to the fact that she is a Lawyer, she is also a lecturer and she found it trite to inform the counsels of the defects in their procedures and all what was going wrong. So I think she did it in good faith, she did not do it maliciously. Descending to the arena was to educate the counsels that were appearing.
ULP: A lot of descending like you pointed came from some errors which she tried to correct, and it showed the lack of law students in this particular area, would you say Law students have learnt a thing or two from the whole process? And are we going to see more mock trials?
Tami Koroye: Definitely. I believe if they are not dull, the students have actually learnt something; both the advocates and the persons in the gallery, they have actually gained experience and learnt something today. I believe, once the present 500level leaves, if the present 400level can keep up the standard of mock competitions, more persons will learn, and also there will be more mock competitions in this Faculty definitely.
Speaking to ULP Correspondents in an exclusive interview, Chief Judge of the mock sitting, Barr. (Mrs) E. Iyamu-Ojo, commended the efforts and participation of the students in such an activity. "Seeing students play out what they have been learning, and try to put themselves in the real world. From the counsels to the witnesses, the whole concept was quite creative, I must say".
However 500level counsels declined to speak with ULP reporters due to the fact they had a test the next day to prepare for. Subsequent attempts to get their opinions proved abortive.
Report by Josh.
No comments:
Post a Comment