Joint court findings over Nigerians’ murder

Written by Staff Writer

Joint high court sitting in Port Harcourt , the Rivers State capital, which on Tuesday convicted Senator George Sekibo for high treason, submitted a damning report to the state governor about the incident involving scores of Nigerians aboard a private vehicle.

The federal investigative panel appointed by the Rivers State governor Rotimi Amaechi had earlier in the week accused the prosecutor of the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation (NNPC) of withholding useful information from the panel.

The state governor, Mr Amaechi had also described the indictment of Sekibo, who was on trial alongside 95 others, as lacking credibility and credible evidence, while saying he was standing by the witness who did not testify.

In their report, the four members of the committee wrote that the evidence they received from Okokomaiko on the road leading to the Lekki toll gate, where the vehicle carrying the 93 people had narrowly escaped shooting by the invaders, was contradictory and conflicting.

As contained in the report, “The testimony of the bereaved was contradictory and contradictory on many crucial issues.

“There were conflicting statements from the several witnesses and indeed from the bereaved. Hence, the panel was compelled to conclude that the evidences from this part of the state was not capable of forming the basis of establishing the guilt of any of the suspects for any offence.

“It is unfortunate that a massacre was so deliberately planned, prepared and executed by killers who attempted to wipe out a community of innocent people.

“It is also unfortunate that the murderers neither respected, nor exhibited the culture of love, fellowship and tolerant attitude that should be expected from men and women of good conscience in our society”.

The panel also said that it was not convinced that Senator Sekibo was behind the grisly attack, yet it added that the planned attack still took place.

“In sum, the charges of the accused senator were not supported by the circumstances of the offence charged. The undersigned further notes that the case of the accused senator was reclassified from high treason to Murder but the planned attack took place.

“In terms of the evidence available, the charge of high treason was not satisfied. That attempt to murder still took place. The defence had violated the rules of evidence and should be arraigned accordingly.”

Leave a Comment