1. Whether the prosecution has proved its case Against the Appellant Beyond Reasonable doubt as required by law. 2. Whether in the circumstances of this case it will not be improper for the Court of Appeal to tamper with the findings of fact of the Trial Court. The Appellant's three issues cover the Respondent's two so I will adopt the Appellant's three issues in the determination of the appeal. APPELLANTS ARGUMENTS: On issue one: whether the offence of importation of 165 kilograms of cocaine was proved against the Appellant in line with provisions of the enabling law, learned counsel faulted the procedure adopted by the Respondent in determining whether or not there were drugs in the containers. Counsel submitted that PW9 testified that when the three containers arrived in Nigeria, two of the three containers were opened and searched by the Joint Task Force (JTF) of the Respondent alone when the normal practice would have been to have the containers opened and searched only in the presence of the owners or those who would come forward to clear them. Counsel argued that the claim by the Respondent that it found cocaine in the second container and was then prompted to inquire through the shipping line and information from the cargo manifest led them to a company called EFCRISAM GROUPS COMPANY LIMITED, Egbeda Lagos is manifestly irregular. The inquiry should have been made and the owners or their clearing agents located before the opening of any of the containers. Counsel submitted that it is unfair to arrest and detain clearing agents and hold them out as the owners of the containers when JTF knows that the clearing agents are never the owners but used by the owners to clear their goods and in most cases the clearing agents may not even know the owners of the containers. Counsel submitted that it is only after breaking the seal of the containers and opening the said containers in the presence of the owners or those who come forward to clear them that the JTF can confirm for sure that the said containers had drugs in them. Counsel queried why the JTF was in such a hurry to open the said containers on the ground that no one claimed ownership when it had in its possession the bills of lading with which it could have traced the owners of the containers. Counsel opined that the unusual practice adopted by the Respondent raise suspicion as to whether the drugs may have been planted in the containers. He indeed submitted that the only conclusion one can arrive at is that there was no cocaine in the two containers when they arrived in Nigeria and that JTF having opened and searched the first container in the absence of the owners and finding no cocaine therein, were disappointed and as a result opened the remaining two containers and planted cocaine therein. It was after that, they now did what they should have done in the first instance. Counsel referred to the evidence of PW9: