earlier set out the elements of the offence in the course of this judgment. For the purposes of clarity, I herein once again reproduce the ingredients of the offence as follows: (a) That the Defendant are Public Officers at the material time; (b) That they used their position or office; (c) They confer corrupt or unfair advantage upon themselves or their relations or other public officer or the relations of other public officer. In the resolution of count one (1) of the charge in the course of this judgment, I have found that the prosecution failed to establish the elements or ingredients of the offence of Section 19 of the Act beyond reasonable doubt against the 2nd Defendant. Thus, I abide by my findings and reasoning stated earlier and I hold the view that the prosecution failed to prove the offence of Section 19 of the Act against the 2nd Defendant beyond reasonable doubt and I so hold. Accordingly, the 2nd Defendant is hereby discharged and acquitted on Count Two (2) of the charge. In relation to the 1st Defendant, I also abide by my findings and reasoning earlier stated in the course of this judgment in the consideration of Section 19 of the Act. I will however add that by the evidence of PW2, 3, 4 and exhibits 9, 10 and 11, the 1st Defendant has interest in the fraudulent allocation of Plot SSI Jikwoyi Extension III. Especially, by exhibit 11, the statement of the 1st Defendant made on 30th January, 2012 when the facts of this matter were so fresh to him stated thus: “It must be informed here that we acquired, effected payment and taken possession of the property by fencing it.” The above admission by the 1st Defendant of his interest in Plot SS1 Jikwoyi Extension III reinforces the testimony of PW4 to the effect that while the Police were investigating the purported trespass on the said Plot, the 1st Defendant entered the subject matter, excavated and fenced the Plot and also erected a structure where the 1st Defendant kept his building materials. 54