It is the process of placing a witness before the court and through series of questions and interrogations obtaining evidence or statements in prove or disprove of a fact. The goal is to obtain evidence that is admissible, relevant, and favourable. It may also be used to tender documentary or real evidence. See section 215 Evidence Act
There are three different types or sides to examination of witnesses, and this is statutorily provided for in S.214 Evidence Act;
a) The examination of a witness by the party who calls him shall be called Examination in-Chief; the prosecution or defence opens it case by calling its first witness, the questions are introductory and may even tender documents.
b) The examination of a witness by a party other than the party who calls him shall be called Cross-Examination; it is used to test accuracy or credibility of a witness and discredit same.
c)Where a witness has been cross-examined and is then examined by the party who called him, such examination shall be called Re-examination. It used to clear ambiguities or inconsistencies that arise from cross-examination.
In examination of witnesses, not all and sundry questions are allowed, generally only relevant questions should be asked, and some specific restrictions exist such as;
a) Leading questions are generally not allowed during examination-in- chief. See sections 221(1) & (2) Evidence Act.* A leading question suggests the answer which the person putting it wishes or expects to receive. Exception are Introductory matters and Undisputed facts
b) Indecent or scandalous questions, questions intended to annoy or to insult and questions relating to credit but are not relevant aren’t allowed during Cross-Examination see S.227,228 Evidence Act
Yes the court can put questions however the purpose of such questions must be to clear up ambiguities or to clarify points which have been left obscure in the evidence given by any witness and may order the production of any document. See S.246 Evidence Act, Uso v. The C O.P. (1972)
This is a witness biased against the party who calls him, is unwilling to tell the truth and testifies against the party who is calling him. See Esan v. State, S.230 Evidence Act.
A party is declared hostile upon application to the court, the witness testimony must be shown to be false or has made contradictory statements. See S.230 Evidence Act
The following would be the consequences of such a declaration;
a. The witness evidence would become unreliable and may even be rejected by the court.
b. The party that called him would be entitled to cross-examine him.
c. The witness statements will be contradicted with his previous statements
d. He would be asked leading questions.
Yes, the actions of his lordship are valid, provided his evidence appears to the Court to be essential to the just decision of the case. See S.200 Criminal Procedure Law, S.197 ACJL Lagos, S.256 ACJA