A witness identified as Paul Amokaha on Wednesday testified before a Makurdi High Court that his statements in the ongoing land dispute case were based solely on what he had heard from Alexius Terwase Ayabam, rather than on any firsthand experience.
Amokaha, a co-plaintiff in the case initiated by Mr Ayabam, had previously adopted his witness statement, which accused Engr. Michael Jijingi of forcefully commencing work on Ayabam’s land using bulldozers and heavily armed soldiers under the direction of Peter Adejoh.
This statement was made under the guidance of his counsel, Gabriel Akponko.
However, during cross-examination by Emmanuel Kpojime, counsel representing the Ministry of Lands, Survey, and Solid Minerals, Benue State, the Governor of Benue State, and the Attorney General and Commissioner of Justice, Benue State, Mr. Amokaha admitted that his statements were based on information provided by Mr. Ayabam and not his own observations.
He conceded that he did not personally witness any government staff or agents accompanied by armed soldiers on Ayabam’s land.
When questioned about the location where he signed his witness statement, Amokaha confirmed that it was done in his lawyer’s office.
Following the testimony of the plaintiff’s first witness, Presiding Judge Justice Theresa Igoche adjourned the case to October 8th, 2024, for continued hearing.
In the case, designated as suit No: MHC/161/2023, Mr. Ayabam claims to be the customary owner of land in Tse-Kamange village, Utur, Bar Council ward, Makurdi Local Government. He alleges that on April 21st, 2023, Engr. Michael Jijingi, acting on behalf of Dr. Peter Adejoh, illegally entered the land with bulldozers and heavily armed soldiers, destroying economic trees without his consent.
Ayabam further alleged that when approached, Engr Jijingi stated that his client possessed title documents for the land issued by the Ministry of Lands, Survey, and Solid Minerals, Benue State.
In response, Peter Adejoh denied any affiliation with Engr Jijingi, stating that he had never authorized any such actions.
He challenged Mr Ayabam to provide strict proof of his allegations, describing the suit as speculative, vexatious, over-reaching, and intended to harass and embarrass him.