Evidence may be described as: something used to prove the existence of a particular fact or disprove the existence of a particular fact. In other words, it is used to establish the existence of a thing. Furthermore, it would mean: using something to establish a fact.
The word ‘Evidence’ is derived from the Latin word ‘Videre’ which literally means ‘to see’ and in Late Latin ‘evidentem’: ground per belief’. thus It follows, that anyone who needs a fact to be established or accepted by the court, must give grounds for his belief by persuading the court to see through his binoculars. It was established in Onibudo v Akibu (1982) 7 SC 29; (1982) ALL NLR 207 @ 226 per BELLO JSC;
“It needs to be emphasized, that the duty of a court is to decide between the parties on the basis of what has been demonstrated, tested, canvases, and argued in court. It is not the duty of a court to cloister justice by making an inquiry into the case outside court…”
Black’s Law Dictionary defines Evidence as: something (including, testimony, documents, and tangible objects) that tends to prove or disprove the existence of an alleged fact.
Having said this, how can you show that you are a part 4 law student? Is it by claiming to be in part 4 law and that you take the ‘law of Evidence class?’ The only way to prove that is by providing your ID CARD. This way, your fact or your statement is not rebuttable. Why? You have a piece of concrete evidence because anyone can easily put on a white shirt and black trousers/skirt. Thus, the ID CARD would be the genuine evidence of your 400L law studentship.
SIMON COOPER is of the opinion that the law of Evidence serves two main purposes.
To wit:
By extension, however, we may then conclude that evidence is the means, by which facts that are submitted for adjudication are proven or disproved. This is practically so because the outcome of any judicial proceedings is determined by what has been established before the court.
Having said that, the provision of S1. EA (2011) talks about the fact that Evidence may be given of facts in issue and relevant facts. It states:
“Evidence may be given in any suit or proceeding of the existence or non-existence of every fact in issue and of such other facts as are hereafter declared to be relevant, and of no others”
Provided that:
Why Do We Need to Establish Facts?
We need to establish evidence basically because of human nature. Human nature is cruel, crude, and wicked. People could tell lies, they could act in a very funny way just so that they could gain an advantage over the other fellow. Thus, the onus lies on the court to determine which fact is genuine or has more legality. This gives rise to the principle ‘Audi Utterem Pattem.’ i.e the court must listen to both sides before it can determine or give judgment on any matter. Having said that, evidence can be oral, documentary, direct, hearsay, original, circumstantial & real evidence.
Having said that, a lot of factors affect the way we perceive facts. It could be societal/environmental factors, religious factors. It could also be through your upbringing, your appreciation of things, etc…
Looking at ‘THE LAW’ In The Application of EVIDENCE.
The law in evidence is basically ‘Trial’. Trial is the method or means of establishing a fact or facts. All of these are procedures that the court in a bid to establish the fact, takes its time to listen to. It must as a matter of fact be said that without evidence, there can never be a fact or the existence of a fact. More so, it should also be said that the law is plain and clear. The position of the law on any matter is clear. Nobody can miss understanding the law. However, it is only the establishment of a fact that makes the court go into trials to establish a fact.
Facts must be established in court, where both parties come to court to present facts and establish evidence in an adversarial system. It should be noted that at the earlier times in the common law court, witnesses could talk so much so that they go out of course of what they ought to say. In order to prevent time wastage in a statement of fact and establishing evidence, the court therefore as a matter of necessity, created Rules of Evidence. i.e, the type of evidence required and what type of facts does the court need. Thus, it means that evidence asks two questions.
So evidence in short deals with what kind of evidence is to be given in court and how it must be given in court.
NB: evidence does not deal with the substance of the case, but the ‘procedure’. Some people call the law of evidence – ‘Adjectival law’. this is so that, without the law of evidence, ‘substantive laws’ cannot be seen in action.
