Words and Phrases

This brings to mind the Latin maxim – 'Ubi jus, ibi remedium' where there is a right, there is a remedy. The law ensures that if the Plaintiff has a right he must have the means to vindicate that right, and a remedy, if he is injured in the enjoyment or exercise of it see Bello V. A-G Oyo State (1986) 5 NWLR (pt. 45) 828 SC.

SHUAIBU LAU V. PEOPLES DEMOCRATIC PARTY [PDP] &

The word ''substitute" means "a person or thing that you use or have instead of the one you normally use or have" – see Peretu & Ors V. Garila & Ors (2012) LPELR 15534(SC), where Ngwuta, JSC, added
Blacks Law Dictionary, 9th Ed., define the word, substitution, a derivative of the word, substitute, as – "a designation of a person or thing to take the place of another person or thing; the process by which one person or thing takes the place of another person or thing."

SHUAIBU LAU V. PEOPLES DEMOCRATIC PARTY [PDP] &

an "event" is defined as "something that happens; the outcome, issue or result of anything" – Dictionary.com.

SHUAIBU LAU V. PEOPLES DEMOCRATIC PARTY [PDP] &

A "process" is a "series of actions or steps taken in order to achieve a particular end" Cambridge Dictionary

SHUAIBU LAU V. PEOPLES DEMOCRATIC PARTY [PDP] &

Now, let me restate what a corroborative evidence is. It is evidence independent of that which it strengthens and discloses not only the commission of an offence but equally links or tends to link the accused with the commission of the offence. It is, put differently, evidence which confirms in some material particular not only that the crime has been committed but, addedly, that it is the accused who committed it.
Corroborative evidence may be direct or circumstantial. In whatever form it comes, the Court must ensure that the corroborating evidence is not only independent of the main evidence it seeks to corroborate but also supports the main evidence by rendering the story of the latter implicating the accused more probable in some material particular. See Omisade & Ors v. The Queen (1964) 1 ALL NLR 233 at 253, Okabichi v. State (1975) 3 SC, Mbele v. State (1990) 4 NWLR (Pt 145) 484, and The State v. James Gwongwan (2015) LPELR- 24837 (SC).
In Edwin Ezigbo v. The State (2012) LPELR-7855 (SC). This Court per Onnoghen JSC (as he then was now CJN) held as follows:
"Corroboration in respect of the offence of rape is evidence which tends to show that the story of the prosecutrix that the accused committed the crime is true."