“We Want To Tender Evidence”

Peter Obi’s legal team is making significant progress, which is a positive development. It’s only natural for the respondents to object to the presentations made by the petitioners. In fact, it would be concerning if they didn’t object. The fact that objection-worthy matters arise demonstrates that the respondents are actively engaged. However, it is the responsibility of the petitioners to prove the necessity of their motions, applications, evidence, or witnesses beyond a reasonable doubt. Ultimately, the side with the strongest argument will prevail.

The legal team representing the petitioners possesses a deep understanding of their opponents and the strategies they may employ to impede progress in court. To gain an advantage, Obi’s team chose not to reveal their hand upfront. This approach aligns with the principles outlined in The Art of War, where it is crucial to surprise and outmaneuver your opponent. From my perspective, this tactic is both legally permissible and brilliant.

In Obi’s petition, the witnesses’ identities were concealed using alphabets to prevent the respondents from attempting any interference. This strategy proved successful. The petitioners also stated their intention to present witnesses and solid evidence in written, audio, and video formats to support their case. However, it came as a surprise to the respondents when the petitioners set up a presentation monitor today. The respondents wanted to view the contents of the recording, but Obi’s team rightly refused, citing legal allowances. In battle, it is unwise to grant your opponent any room to breathe.

Today’s proceedings were not a waste of time, contrary to what many may think; they were successful. It was a challenging fight to have the court admit the presented evidence, and I commend Dr. Livy Uzoukwu’s team for a job well done. Hopefully, tomorrow will involve fewer arguments and more informative presentations. Follow @General_Oluchi on Twitter for live updates of the proceedings.