A prosecution witness in the trial of Supreme Court Judge, Justice Sylvester Ngwuta, told a Federal High Court, Abuja, Friday, said that the Nigerian Immigration Service replaced the lost passport of Ngwuta because the organisation had no cause to doubt the affidavit evidence deposed to by the defendant when he reported the loss of the document.
The witness, an official of the NIS, Tanko Kutama, said that a new passport was issued to Justice Ngwuta by the immigtation, having been convinced that he actually lost the first one.
The witness told justice John Tsoho that Justice Ngwuta did not report back to the immigration when he allegedly found his missing passport.
Katana who was cross examined by counsel to Justice Ngwuta, Chief Kanu Agabi, told the court that the immigration rules made allowance for genuine mistake, but said in the instant case the defendant cannot be said to have made a genuine mistake.
The witness further informed the court, that his forensic report showed that Justice Ngwuta was using the two standard passports interchangeable, at the time of his arrest on October 7, 2016, by the operatives of the Department of State Security (DSS).
Kutana said that ordinarily the Supreme Court Justice who is being prosecuted by goverment on charges of money laundering and breach of trust ought to have returned the recovered passport to the immigration when it was found.
The witness who confirmed that four diplomatic passports and two standard passports were found in the possession of the defendant said that his forensic analysis on the six passports did not show evidence of forgery
“I did the analysis on the six passports to determine whether there was forgery and by the tine I concluded my analysis of the passports I found no evidence of forgery in any of them
He admitted that he did not meet or interrogate the defendant during the cause of his analysis, so as to obtain his own side of the story, because it was not needed.
He said “there are circumstances under which a citizen can have more than one passport, but not two same passports at the same time as in the instant case
“I ascribe illegality on the two standard passports found with the defendant, because the defendant ought to have returned one of the passports to the immigration,“ he told the court.
Further trial has been adjourned until October 20