Furthermore, 2nd Defendant’s Counsel submitted that exhibit 9 was damped on the Court to make findings as whether Pax Education Resources Limited is owned by the 1st Defendant’s relations. At paragraphs 4.26- 4.44 of the 2nd Defendant’s final written address, learned Counsel submitted to the effect that assuming (but without conceding) that the prosecution was able to prove any or the ingredients of the offences, he submitted that by the testimony of the 2nd Defendant as DW6, the 2nd Defendant was able to disprove the allegations against him. According to the learned Counsel that the 2nd Defendant testified that he has no power to allocate or grant land to any person as he was merely the secretary of the land adjudication and allocation committee whose only duty was to issue letters of allocation to those approved by the committee whose Chairman was either the Minister or the Chairman of the area Council. He submitted that the evidence of DW6 was corroborated by both prosecution and the defence witnesses. He then referred me to the elicited evidence of PWs1,2,3 and DW1 under cross examination and submitted that their testimonies supported the evidence of DW6 of the existence of land Adjudication and Allocation Committee and that it is the committee that allocates and then direct the secretary of the Committee to issue allocation letters. Learned Counsel for the 2nd Defendant contented that the only nexus between the 2nd Defendant and the present charge is that the 2nd Defendant signed letter of allocation of both Pax Education Resources Limited and Fine Trust Academy which the 2nd Defendant explained that there are cases of double allocation resulting from human error. 2nd Defendant’s Counsel submitted that DW6 explained to the effect that where such cases of double allocation arise, the procedure is to relocate one of them to another plot. Learned Counsel also referred me to the evidence of PWs1 and 3 under cross examination to the effect that double allocation exist and a committee do resolve the issues of double allocation particularly the first on time gets the land. 28