and also the confessional statement of the Defendant and find him guilty. It is the submission that the retraction of confessional statement do not render it inadmissible or insufficient to ground a conviction. See TESWONOR v STATE (2008) 1 NWLR (Pt 1069) 630 at 654 Paras F – G. That the Defendant ought to have objected to the admissibility of the confessional statement at the time of tendering same. See ALO v STATE (Supra). On the issue of not calling Himma Abubakar as a witness for the prosecution, it is submitted that failure to call Himma Abubakar is not fatal to the prosecution’s case which has been proved beyond reasonable doubt. In response to the Defendant’s submission that the prosecution failed/omitted to prove existence of contract between SEI Nigeria Limited and NAF, it is submitted that the submission of Defendant’s senior counsel with respect to the above lacks substance and merit. There is evidence before the court which established that NAF took benefit of the supplies by SEI Nig. Ltd and there is no dispute between NAF and SEI Nigeria Limited on the validity of the contract. 29