Whether Public documents must be certified to be admissible in evidence

KALU IGU UDUMA V. PRINCE ARUA ARUNSI & 14 ORS

KALU IGU UDUMA
Appellant(s)

AND

PRINCE ARUA ARUNSI & 14 ORS
Respondent(s)

CA/PH/EPT/177/08

"Public documents in your possession must be certified to be admissible in evidence. It is immaterial whether they were pleaded and were relevant to the proccedings. This was made clear in BUHARI v. OBASANJO (2005) 13 NWLR Pt. 941 Pg. 1 at Pg. 177 where the Supreme Court rejected the 140 unit results tendered by one Bisi Lawal, Ogun State Governorship candidate of ANPP because the results being uncertified by INEC were not tendered by the makers. In this case, the polling agents of the Appellants who were given these duplicate copies at the unit level must identify their signature on the duplicate copy as one of the authors of the document. Without that, the documents being uncertified by the custodian of the original - 3rd Respondent would be regarded as documentary hearsay and rendered inadmissible as evidence." Per OGUNWUMIJU, J.C.A.(P. 105, paras. A-E)