Wing Commander T. L. A. Shekete V. The Nigerian Air Force (2000)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report

OGUNTADE, J.C.A. 

The appellant, Wing Commander T. L. A. Shekete was arraigned on 22nd July, 1996 along with eight other Air force Officers before a General Court Martial. In the charge against the appellant there were seven counts. He was found not guilty on the 1st and 2nd counts of the charge but guilty on the others and sent to various terms of imprisonment. Dissatisfied with his conviction and sentence the appellant has brought this appeal on ten grounds.

In the appellant’s brief filed, the issues for determination were formulated as follows:-

“(i) Whether there were material conflict/contradictions and inconsistencies in the prosecution case and if there were, was the GCM right in picking those ultimately that favoured their verdict (on the side of the prosecution)?.

(ii) Whether based on the evidence before the General Court Martial, the conviction of the appellant on all grounds relating to receiving stolen property is not perverse and unmaintainable?.

(iii) Whether the GCM (trial Court) adequately considered the defence of the appellant or at all?.

(iv) Whether without proferring any reason, the GCM was right in ignoring the submissions of the judge advocate and thereby convicting the appellant against sound legal and factual reasons exposed before the Court?.

(v) Based on the GCM obvious lack of consideration for the case of the defence and legal submissions at the address stage and disregard for the Judge Advocate’s submission, the GCM could be said to have acted and exercised their discretion judicially and judiciously?.

(vi) Whether in the circumstances of this case and in particular having regard to the principles of fair hearing, the GCM was right in convicting the appellant for forgery when the purported forged document was rejected in evidence at the trial and no evidence was called in proof of the charge?.

(vii) Whether the mere signing of Form C06 and Form C02 is a sufficient proof of engaging in private business?.

(viii) Whether there was sufficient proof before the GCM to-warrant a finding of guilt on ground of disobedience to standing orders when the existence of such orders was not proved and the knowledge of the standing order was denied by even prosecution witnesses and the appellants?.”

The respondent formulated the issues for determination thus:

“(1) Whether in the light of prepondence of evidence both oral and documentary placed before the General Court Martial, the prosecution can be said to have proved the charges preferred/against the 4th appellant beyond reasonable doubt and whether the judgment of the General Court Martial can be supported having regard to the evidence adduced and accepted at the trials by the General Court Martial?.

(2) Whether in the light of other evidences oral and documentary the principle of fair hearing was breached by the General Court Martial in convicting the appellant?.