4. CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE - OFFENCE OF DEFILEMENT: What the prosecution must prove in order to sustain a conviction for the offence of defilement "The ingredients of the offence of defilement were set out by the Supreme Court in the case of Boniface Adonike v. The State (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt. 1458) 237 at 284 - 285, per Rhodes-Vivour, JSC as follows: "Section 218 supra creates the offence of defilement of a girl under the age of 11 years. To succeed the prosecution must prove beyond reasonable doubt: (a)that the accused/appellant had sex with the child who was under the age of 11 years. (b)that there was penetration into the vault of the vagina. (c)the evidence of the child must be corroborated. The evidence for defilement is the same as in rape expect that for defilement it is immaterial whether the act was done with or without the consent of the child. This is the well laid down position of the law, that a girl under the age of 11 is a child and so is not capable of consenting to sex. The Court would hold that she did not consent even if she did consent. A child cannot consent to sex, that is the position of the law." See also Edwin Ezigbo v. The State (2012) 16 NWLR (Pt. 1326) 318." Per ADUMEIN, J.C.A. (Pp. 27-28, Paras. B-A) (...read in context) 5. CONSTITUTIONAL LAW - RIGHT TO FAIR HEARING: Whether a party who had an opportunity of being heard but did not utilize it can bring an action for breach of fair hearing "the record of proceedings, summarized earlier in this judgment, shows that the appellant was given adequate opportunity to cross-examine PW3 but he wasted that opportunity by insisting that the learned trial Judge should transfer the case, without advancing a reason for his request. In the case of Newswatch Communications Limited v. Alhaji Aliyu Ibrahim Atta (2006) 12 NWLR (Pt. 993) 144 at 181 182, per Mahmud Mohammed, JSC (as he then was), the Supreme Court held, concerning the concept of fair hearing as follows: "There is no doubt at all that the principles of fair hearing is fundamental to all Court procedure and proceedings. Like jurisdiction, the absence of it vitiates proceedings however well conducted. See Salu v. Egeibon (1994) 6 NWLR (Pt.348) 23 at 40; Ceekay Traders Ltd. v. G.M. Company Ltd. (1992) 2 NWLR (Pt. 222) 132 and Atano v. A.G., Bendel State (1988) 2 NWLR (Pt. 75) 201. Fair hearing according to the law envisages that both parties to a case be given opportunity of presenting their respective cases without let or hindrance from the beginning to the end. See Ekpeto v. Wanogho (2004) 18 NWLR (Pt. 905) 394 at 411. Fair hearing in accordance with the law also envisages that the Court or tribunal hearing the parties' case, should be fair and impartial without it showing any degree of bias against any of the parties. See Nwafor Elike v. Nwakwoala & Ors. (1984) 12 S.C. 301 and Isiyaku