TEV_Media
The operations of mobile courts in summarily trying cum conviction of suspects have been a great concern for a long time, this is so because its modus operandi falls short of the required ingredients of just and fair prosecution of a court.
I would like some of my lawyer friends, I mean the very bold ones among them to simply respond to a few questions to determine if the mobile court is fair in its operation or carrying out a kind of legalised jungle justice.
1. Is the testimony of an accuser without supporting evidence(s) e.g. (pictures, videos, eye witness, document) sufficient to convict a suspect?
2. Shouldn't a suspect have access to a legal representation in a mobile court?
3. Is it not possible for an arresting agent of a state to lie against an accused by mere testifying?
4. Is it proper that an accused cannot have access to bail conditions while he argues his case in the mobile court in subsequent sitting?
For time and space factors, let me leave it as this for the now.
Please, we need answers from our legal minds to determine if the mobile court is right in its mode of operations or we all can continue to keep quiet in the midst for a legalised jungle justice.
Leftist Osazee Edigin
PRO
EDOCSO
No comments:
Post a Comment