In view of the evidence so far led by the prosecution, I am satisfied that the prosecution has also proved the 3rd count charge against the 3rd defendant beyond reasonable doubt and accordingly found the 3rd defendant guilty as charged in respect of the offence of illegal possession of firearms contrary to section 3 (1) of the Robbery and Firearms {special provision} Act Cap. R 11 LFN 2004. In paragraph 3.14 of the adopted written address of counsel to the 3rd defendant it was argued that exhibit “E” and “E1” {which is the confessional statement of the 3rd defendant} was not recorded in compliance with the provisions of section 17 (1), (2), (3) and (4) of the Sokoto State ACJL 2019 and therefore inadmissible. In her reply prosecuting counsel submitted that the statement was recorded in compliance with the requirements of the law and that its authenticity and veracity can be seen in the evidence of PW2, PW4 and PW5 and urge the court to so hold. - Nwachukwu V. State {2007} ALL FWLR pt 390 p 1380 - Amoshima V. State {2009} 4 NCC 297 - Bassey V. State {2012} 3-4 MJSC 77 She further submitted that by the evidence of PW2, it is clear that there was substancial compliance with the provisions of section 17 of the Sokoto State Administration of Criminal Justice Law 2019 as the defendant was given the opportunity but opted not to exercise his right. 31