SOWORE IN COURT FOR THE APPLICATION OF THE BAIL VARIATION (FOR THE RANSOM REQUESTED TO BE REVIEWED) PART 2

The prosecuting counsel’s turn, his primary claim is that our application for bail variation has no valid affidavit with it, claiming that the facts contained in our affidavit are derived from information got from Sowore.

He further claimed that Akin Sowore, who is to stand as surety for the defendant was never at the DSS facility. [At this point, our counsel interjected to state that that was incorrect as Akin Sowore was in fact at the DSS facility on the 8th of Oct, which the prosecuting counsel then asked that Sowore’s lawyer prove this to be true.

He continued by insisting that the judge should dismiss the application as there is no valid affidavit to back it up, then varied his claim by saying that the enclosed affidavit had not given serious reason why the application be varied apart from Sowore being a lecturer in the US, something that he says there is no proof of [there is ample, irrefutable proof of this fact].

The prosecuting attorney stated that even if there is a valid affidavit, the Judge must still note that all cases quoted by Falana have no relationship with Sowore’s. He claimed that when Ibori was granted bail, he met the conditions. It was only when he needed the passport to travel, that he appealed but insisted that Ibori met the conditions first.

On addressing the public, he said “If your freedom of expression will hamper on national security, the court has the right to withhold such.”

Falana was up again as he was given the opportunity to respond. He stated that the fact that Sowore is a lecturer was not challenged and went on to demand the Prosecuting counsel apologise to the court for saying Taiwo Taiwo’s order had been taken over by events.

Falana said that Section 45 deals with Nigeria’s national security. That it is the court that decides what is a threat to national security and not the government.

He clarified that Sowore using the term “Revolution” has nothing to do with national security. Even the president had used it severally and he was not challenged – a fact that had been raised in this same case.

On the issue of the surety Akin Sowore, Falana maintained that he did not need swear an affidavit as the lawyer who accompanied him to the DSS facility - Marshal Abubakar - had done so already.

The judge is writing now as all counsel are done with arguments.

Una never see anything