The importance of the law and principles of evidence in law practice cannot be over emphasised. There is no one single lawyer who knows it all. It is rightly said that a good lawyer is the one who knows some good bit of the law and knows where and how to find the rest when he needs them. But there is one absolute truth about all the talk of knowledge and skillfulness of one lawyer as against the others, and it is that it all depends mostly on the lawyer’s mastery of the law and use of evidence.
The law of evidence is the thread that is used to fittingly tie the law and facts in a case. Much of the victories secured in prosecution of cases, whether of the civil or criminal class, always has something to do with how, by the law and principles of evidence, the facts and circumstances are woven together to fit the applicable and relevant laws, having all adroitly subjected to the governing rules and principles of practice of the particular court. It will not be a wrong analogy to say that what practicing lawyers who have great understanding of the law of evidence and those who have only a scant grasp of it would make of their cases in court would be much like what you would expect of professional and well-seasoned chefs, on the one side, and armature bachelor-cooks, on the otherside, both of whom are given exactly the same ingredients and other stuff to prepare a particular delicacy would make of the task. If the facts and the relevant laws are regarded as the skeleton of the body of the prosecution of a case, then the law of evidence is all of the joint cartilage, sinew and flesh that hold them together for strength, effectiveness, smoothness, even for beauty and elegance. A practicing lawyer, or even a law student, who fails, refuses or neglects to have a good mastery of the law of evidence is one to be pitied.
The extant Law of Evidence is the Evidence Act, 2011, Cap E14, LFN and it is on it that everything hereunder is based.