LEGAL PRINCIPLE: EVIDENCE LAW – Contradictions in Prosecution Case – Duty of Court
PRINCIPLE STATEMENT
Where one prosecution witness contradicts another on a material point, the prosecution ought to lay a foundation, such as showing that the witness is hostile, before asking the court to reject one testimony and accept another.
RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)
Per Uwais, JSC, citing Onubagu v. The State (1974) 9 S.C. 1 in Kwaghshir v. The State (1995) NLC-351994(SC) at p. 11; Para A.
"We are also of the view that where one witness called by the prosecution in a criminal case contradicts another prosecution witness on a material point, the prosecution ought to lay some foundation, such as showing that the witness is hostile, before they can ask the court to reject the testimony of one witness and accept that of another witness in preference for the evidence of discredited witness."
EXPLANATION / SCOPE
The prosecution cannot arbitrarily choose between contradictory witnesses. A foundation must be laid to discredit a witness. The principle applies to criminal trials. The prosecution may treat a witness as hostile. The court will evaluate the contradictions. The rule protects the accused from selective reliance on evidence. The prosecution must present its case consistently. The court may reject contradictory evidence if unexplained. The principle promotes fairness.