REX
V.
GORDIN OKOYE

JELR 80600 (WACA)    
West Africa Court of Appeal  ·  West Africa [For WACA cases]
 · 
Other Citations
1938 4 WACA 64-65
CORAM
Cor. Kingdon, C.J., Carey and Graham Paul, JJ.
Core Terms Beta
appellant
evidence
case
conviction
record
testimony
witness
appeal
court
crown
section
witnesses
addition
alleged false testimony
carey
counsel
criminal code
different interpretation
evidence of the proceedings
evidence of the statements
evidence of the truth of such statements
exact words
examination
first place
graham paul
hearsay
high court of the enugu-onitsha division of perjury
judge
judgment
months i.h.l.
native court
nigeria
own knowledge
particulars
perjury
perjury contra
reason
record of proceedings
section 47a of the protectorate courts ordinance
sentence
statements
true copy
true copy of the record
verdict of acquittal
witness's evidence

- KINGDON, C.J., NIGERIA, CAREY AND GRAHAM PAUL, JJ.

The appellant in this case was convicted in the High Court of the Enugu-Onitsha Division of perjury contrary to section 118 of the Criminal Code and sentenced to six months I.H.L. He appeals to this Court and counsel .for the Crown agrees that there is no evidence to support the conviction.

In the first place the testimony alleged to be given is not sufficiently proved. It is regrettable that the exact words alleged to constitute the perjury are not set out in the particulars. This should always be done, more especially as section 47A of the Protectorate Courts Ordinance provides for a record to be kept by Judge and expressly provides that that record or a certified true copy thereof shall be admitted as evidence of the proceedings and of the statements made by the witnesses.

In this case one witness swears that the testimony alleged to be given by the appellant was so given, and a certified true copy of the record in the case was put in presumably to corroborate the witness's evidence. But on examination this record does not corroborate that the appellant gave the testimony alleged. Some testimony is recorded which is capable of being interpreted so as to corroborate but is also capable of a different interpretation. This is not sufficient and the conviction cannot be upheld for this reason alone.

In addition the evidence that what the appellant is alleged to have said is untrue is also insufficient.

No witness is called to prove this of his own knowledge. Instead the evidence relied upon consists of (a) a record of proceedings in a Native Court which per se in not evidence, and (b) the evidence of the other witness in the same case in which the alleged false testimony was given. This is only hearsay; though the record is admissible as evidence of the statements made by the witnesses it is not evidence of the truth of such statements.

The appeal is therefore allowed, the conviction and sentence are quashed and it is directed that a judgment and verdict of acquittal be entered.

The appellant is discharged.