Chief Gani Fawehinmi was of the view that the primary duty of the Lagos State House Of Assembly is to determine if any law has been breached by the Lagos State Governor at this stage and not to determine the .impeachment of the Governor now. He said the House of Assembly must find out if the Governor has committed any crime against the laws of Lagos State.
The issue, according to him is that there are 2 (two) affidavits deposed to by. .the Governor of Lagos State and false declaration have been established. These affidavits are in INEC formCF001 deposed to before the Commissioner for Oath on 28 December 1998 and an affidavit titled: “Affidavit in Respect of Loss of Certificates” sworn to at the Ikeja High Court of Justice on 29 December 1998. Crime, according to him, has been committed since the provisions of sections 191 and 192 of the Criminal Code, Cap.32,
Laws of Lagos State 1994 has been breached
Finally Chief Fawehinmi summed up his evidence by stating that Governor Bola Tinubu volunteered false information on oath to enable him contest for the Governor of Lagos State.
Written defence on behalf of Governor Bola Ahmed Tinubu by his counsel, Femi Falana Esq.
Specifically the allegations made against the Lagos State Governor, Mr. Ahmed Bola Tinubu include perjury, certificate forgery and false information (lying on oath). Having regards to the facts of the case we case we submitted as follows:
The offence of perjury is defined under Section) 117 of the Criminal Code Cap, 31 Laws of Lagos State 1994 to mean any false testimony given “in any judicial proceeding, or for the purpose of instituting any judicial proceeding.”
In Omeregie Vs D.P.P(1963)All N.L.R 169 at page l72 the Federal Supreme Court held as follows:
“ the real issue was whether the evidence relating to the three assignment of perjury was material to the question or questions in the civil case, and whether it is clear from the evidence that the Appellant has knowingly given false testimony in that regards”
Since no iota of evidence has been led to show that the facts contained in that affidavit in dispute were given in the cause of judicial proceedings, the offense of perjury cannot be sustained in the circumstance of this case.