The Nation Newspaper

Tag: Dasuki

  • Dasuki’s lawyer shuns court’s hearing for Benchers’ meeting

    Dasuki’s lawyer shuns court’s hearing for Benchers’ meeting

    Federal High Court in Abuja has given permission to the Federal Government to conduct its case in the trial of ex-National Security Adviser (NSA), Sambo Dasuki, in the absence of his lawyer.

    Justice Ahmed Mohammed gave the consent yesterday while ruling on an application by prosecution lawyer, Dipo Okpeseyi (SAN), as the former NSA’s counsel, Joseph Daudu (SAN), shunned court hearing for Body of Benchers at the Supreme Court.

    Dasuki is being tried before the court on offences of alleged unlawful possession of firearms and money laundering.

    When the case was called yesterday, Dasuki, dressed in white native attire, stood up from where he sat on the right corner of the court and went into the dock. But, his lawyer was absent.

    An official of the court later drew the judge’s attention to a letter from Dasuki’s lawyer, explaining his absence and seeking an adjournment.

    Daudu wrote the court to explain that he could not attend court because he was attending a meeting of the Body of Benchers at the Supreme Court.

    Okpeseyi, who admitted being copied with the letter, said it was unfortunate that the defence lawyer chose the meeting of Body of Benchers over his client’s liberty and the court’s authority.

    The prosecution lawyer, who agreed to return on the day suggested by Dasuki’s lawyer, prayed the court to allow the prosecution to proceed with its case should the defence lawyer fail again to turn up on the next adjourned date.

    Justice Mohammed agreed with Okpeseyi that the adjournment sought by the defence “will definitely scuttle the trial, because if the court were to refuse the application, the trial would have proceeded in the absence of the defendant’s counsel.

    “The defendant cannot defend himself if the trial is to go on. I am of the view that adjournment should be granted in the interest of justice.

    “It is my hope however that the defence will sit up in this case so that trial will go on unabated.

    “I agree with the prosecution counsel that, if the defence counsel is not present in court on the next adjourned date, or the defence is not ready to proceed on the next date, the prosecution is at liberty to proceed with the trial.”

    Justice Mohammed consequently adjourned to April 9 for continuation of trial.

  • Dasuki’s aide under probe over diversion of N36.4b

    Dasuki’s aide under probe over diversion of N36.4b

    • EFCC traces N3.12b meant to protect dams, wells to his company’s account
    •Agency investigates release of N10b for 2015 governorship poll

    The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) has traced N3.12billion to the bank account of a company allegedly owned by a Special Assistant to a former National Security Adviser, Col. Sambo Dasuki (rtd).

    The sum is suspected to have been diverted from about N36.4billion voted by the Goodluck Jonathan administration for the protection of dams, wells and sources of water in the North-East against being poisoned by Boko Haram.

    Investigation by the EFCC shows that only N3.12billion of the N36.4billion was paid to a company allegedly owned by the suspect.

    A review of the company’s account suggests that the cash may have been used for “political and personal patronage.

    Detectives of EFCC are working on the theory that the N3.12billion was shared by politicians, friends of the government and relations of the former NSA.

    It has already set up a team to interrogate suspected beneficiaries of the N3.12billion to explain the services rendered to deserve such a huge payment.

    The balance of N33billion which is supposed to be in an account domiciled in the Office of the Secretary to the Government of the Federation (SGF) is yet to be traced. It was operated by the Office of the National Security Adviser (ONSA).

    The Nation gathered that sometime in 2011, ex-President Goodluck Jonathan received a memo alleging threats by Boko Haram to poison all the dams, wells and sources of water in the North-East and other insurgency flashpoints in the country.

    Although Jonathan initially ignored the memo, it was exhumed in March 2014 by the Office of National Security Adviser (ONSA) when the insurgency got ferocious.

    The memo recommended the need to protect the sources of water in the North-East.

    Investigators of the alleged diversion said: “Following the delay in attending to the request, a fresh memo was raised in March 2014. At the end of the day, about N36.4billion was approved and released to ONSA through the Naira account maintained by the Office of the Secretary to the Government of the Federation but operated by the ex-NSA and the Permanent Secretary, Special Services.

    “From the N36.4billion, about N3, 125,000,000 were released to a company already traced to a former Special Assistant to the ex-NSA. Detectives have discovered that the balance of over N33billion was diverted.

    “Even the profiling of the N3, 125,000,000 account of the slush company indicated that the cash was used for political and personal patronage including transfer to some relations of the ex-NSA.”

    A highly placed source in EFCC confirmed yesterday that operatives “are working round the clock to track the whereabouts of over N33billion because no contract was executed for the protection of the dams and other sources of water in the North-East.

    “As for the beneficiaries of the N3.125billion, we are already on their trail through bank records, accounts and Bank Verification Number (BVN) which have proved useful to our operations. We will ensure the recovery of the diverted funds.”

    The latest bend of the investigation also showed curious spending of N20billion by ONSA between March and May 2015.

    It was learnt that detectives claimed that “the purpose of the cash withdrawals from the government’s account was unknown.”

    Sources said: “Immediately after the Presidential Election on March 28, 2015, ONSA requested for another N10billion to prepare for the Governorship Election on April 11. It was approved again by the ex-President.

    “And in May 2015, another N10billion was approved and released to ONSA. All these funds were remitted to ONSA outside the budget allocated to security agencies for the 2015 General Elections.

    “Our operatives are investigating the rationale behind these releases; how the funds were diverted; culpable officers and how to recover the cash.

    “So far, our team of investigators cannot trace any project executed with the N36.4billion to protect water sources from being poisoned by Boko Haram.”

    Responding to a question, the source added: “About one and half years after the N36.4billion were withdrawn, the Nigerian Army on September 2015 confirmed that some sources of water in Borno State were polluted and poisoned by the insurgents.

     

    “We strongly suspected that the votes for the protection of sources of water were diverted or converted into personal use.”

    On September 15, 2015, the Deputy Director, Army Public Relations said information reaching its Theatre Command, Operation Lafiya Dole indicated that Boko Haram terrorists had now resorted to poisoning water sources like wells and streams in areas they were dislodged by gallant troops or areas threatened by offensive operations.

    He said the insurgents had allegedly “poisoned cattle water ponds in Kangallam village along Marte and Abadam axis in Borno State where a large number of cattle died after drinking water from the ponds.”

    “The action of the terrorists is no doubt aimed at taking their own pound of flesh on the innocent citizens and livestock as a result of the unbearable offensive operations through the combined effort of the Nigerian Army and the Nigerian Air Force to rout them out completely from their enclaves and hide-outs all over the North East.

    “In view of this development, citizens are called upon to avoid as much as possible drinking water from unverified sources, especially in locations that troops routed out Boko Haram terrorists.”

    Dasuki is currently standing trial for corruption related cases.

     

  • Dasuki says he can’t recall his dealings with Metuh

    Dasuki says he can’t recall his dealings with Metuh

    Former National Security Adviser (NSA), Mohammed Dasuki told a Federal High Court in Abuja on Friday that he could not recall his dealings with ex-spokesman of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), Olisa Metuh while in office.
    Dasuki, who admitted knowing Metuh as the National Publicity Secretary of the PDP, also said he could not recall off hand whether or not N400m was paid to Metuh through his company, Destra Investment.
    The ex-NSA also said he could not confirm, without access to his personal records, the nature of the relationship that existed between his office, Metuh and Destra.
    Dasuki spoke in Abuja  while testifying as the 8th witness of the 1st defendant in t on-going trial of Metuh and his Destra Investment.
    Metuh is being tried with  Destra on a seven-count charge of money laundering involving alleged cash transaction of $2 million and unlawful receipt of N400m from the office of the NSA.
    Led in evidence by Metuh’s lawyer, Onyechi Ikpeazu (SAN), Dasuki was asked if he knew what it meant to say ‘due process was followed as contained in the document reflecting the payment of N400m to the defendants, he said he understood the statement to imply that all laid down procedures were complied with.
    Dasuki said he has never been charged or convicted in relation to hi activities while in office,  except in the court of public opinion.
     “I say No. I have not been charged or convicted of any unlawful act with respect to the 1st defendant”.
    On who who took directives from, he said as the NSA, he was answerable to he President, who by then was Goodluck Jonathan.
    Under cross-examination by the prosecution lawyer, Sylvanus Tahir, Dasuki still insisted he needed to consult his records before he could recall details of his relationship with the defendants.
    When asked to recall some duties of his office as the NSA, and whether the office was meant for only people with military background, he said “Maybe you can ask the President, who appointed me what he was looking for in an NSA when he appointed me.”
    “I will leave you with your understanding that the office of the NSA is meant for only people with military training or background.
    “However, so far, I believe Dr. Bukar Shuaibu and Prof. Galadanji where the only people that did not have military or security background, who have occupied the office of the NSA.”
    When asked to provide the job description of the NSA, he said: “It has responsibility as regards issues of security, but for the details I will refer you to the National Security Agencies Act.
    “The NSA to the best of my knowledge is a public officer.”
    Dasuki said he did not know if the office of th NSA haS any affiliation with any political party.
    On whether he met Metuh while in office, Dasuki said: “I know Chief Olisa Metuh as a person. I know he was the Publicity Secretary of the PDP which was the party in government that I served proudly.”
    “I don’t personally know the 2nd defendant, but as to whether I knew it officially, I have to make reference to my record.
    “I am not aware of the relationship or transaction that existed between the defendants and the ONSA. Not without, record, I cannot remember.”
    At a point Tahir asked that Dasuki be given when confronted with a document earlier tendered in court, marked exhibit B, to which an e-payment mandate for N400m allegedly paid to Metuh through his company’s Diamond Bank Plc account was attached.
    The payment mandate said  to have been authorised on November 24, 2014, was alleged to be payment for security services.
    When asked to confirm the document, Dasuki said  the document emanated from the prosecution, who he claimed was “desperate to get a conviction”.
    “That is why I insist on getting and referring to my own records. This is not the original document, it is a photocopy.”
    Tahir later asked Dasuki to tell th court the services rendered by the defendant to warrant the payment of N400m to them. Dasuki said: “I have nothing to say. If you want an answer, then I should have access to my records.
    “It will be useful for the counsel to get himself acquainted with the National Security Agencies Act.”
  • Dasuki not sure if he paid Metuh N400m for security

    Dasuki not sure if he paid Metuh N400m for security

    Former National Security Adviser, Sambo Dasuki  on Friday told the Federal High Court in Abuja that he could not remember if the sum of N400m paid to a former National Publicity Secretary of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) Olisa Metuh, in 2014, was for the provision of security services.

    More details later..

     

  • Dasuki: Court declines request for arrest warrant against DSS’ DG

    Dasuki: Court declines request for arrest warrant against DSS’ DG

    Federal High Court in Abuja yesterday declined request by lawyer to ex-President Goodluck Jonathan, Mike Ozekhome (SAN) and another Senior Advocate, Tochukwu Onwugbufor for the issuance of a bench warrant against the Director General of the Department of State Services (DSS), Lawal Daura.

    Onwugbufor is a lawyer in the defence team of former spokesman of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), Olisa Metuh, representing Metuh’s firm, Destra Investment Limited in their trial for alleged money laundering offences.

    Onwugbufor and Ozekhome sought the issuance of bench warrant on the DSS’ DG for allegedly flouting the court’s order directing him (the DG, DSS) to produce former National Security Adviser (NSA), Mohammed Dasuki as defence witness in Metuh’s trial.

    Both lawyers were reacting to an application by the prosecution lawyer, Sylvanus Tahir for the court to allow DSS sometime to comply with its order to produce Dasuki.

    At the commencement of proceedings yesterday, trial judge, Justice Okon Abang enquired from Tahir if the DSS produced Dasuki in court as he directed at the previous proceedings.

    Tahir, in response, gave details of efforts by the EFCC to ensure that the DSS produced Dasuki as ordered by the court. Tahir said he has spoken with the Legal Adviser of DSS.

    He said, “Up till this morning, exactly a quarter after 7am, the said Legal Adviser informed me that they were ready and willing to bring the intended witness to court, but that the subpoenaed witness said, on the advice of his legal team, said he has been advised not to come to court.

    “I advised the Legal Adviser, that in the circumstances the DSS found itself, they should personally come to court this morning to explain their situation to the honourable court. Our own role to facilitate by liaising with the DSS, so we have played our part,” Tahir said.

    Responding, Metuh’s lawyer, Emeka Etiaba (SAN) urged the court to disregard Tahir’s explanation on the grounds that the letter he presented in support of his position was inadmissible. He argued that it amounted to hearsay and that the letter from the EFCC to the DSS ought to have been brought to the court’s attention by way of an affidavit.

    He gave indication that his client would reassess his position as it relates to the summons on Jonathan in view of the heat generated so far, including the application filed by the ex-President.

    Etiaba said his client’s request to call Jonathan as witness had been “misconstrued outside this court”.

    Because his client was pained by the development, he intends to sit with his legal team to review the motion filed for Jonathan by Ozekhome, in order to take a position on it.

    He said, “Efforts by the first defendant (Metuh) to avail himself of necessary evidence in his trial has been misconstrued outside this court and the first defendant feels very pained because of dangerous insinuation that has been ascribed to his decision to call evidence that will help him to go through this phase of his life.

    “May I finally submit that the first defendant will go through the application with us and take a decision on what to go with Ozekhome’s motion,” Etiaba said.

    When asked to respond, Onwugbufor said he agreed with Etiaba, but took a step further to ask for the arrest of the DG, DSS for allegedly flouting the court’s order on Dasuki’s production.

    Onwugbufor, who argued that the DSS was not truthful in its excuse for not producing Dasuki, urged the court to apply the provisions of Section 244 of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA) by ordering Lawal’s arrest.

    He said it was ridiculous that someone in the custody of a security agency could determine when he wishes to be taken to court. He said the DSS was play game with the court.

    He said: “I do not think it lies in the mouth of DSS to say that he (Dasuki) refused to comply with the order of the court. It is more contemptuous that the DSS fails to appear before the court to explain the situations in their environment. My lord this is unacceptable.

    “If they have an atom of respect for the court they would appear before your lordship this morning and I refer your lordship to section 244 of ACJA. Your lordship has power to issue arrest warrant against DSS. Your lordship will now issue a warrant of arrest against the Director-General of DSS in person,” he said.

    At that point the judge asked him if the court could issue a bench warrant on the DG, DSS in person when the order made by the Court of Appeal on September 29 this year for the production of Dasuki before the trial court did not contain the name of the DSS’ DG.

    In response, Onwugbufor said, “I agree that his name is not mentioned but it has legal consequences and connotation. This is because a human being is occupying the office of the DG of DSS.

    “It would have been a different case if the subpoena was issued to DSS. But this is different. The order was issued against the occupant of the office, to appear before your lordship and explain to your lordship his failure to produce Dasuki in court to show how a detainee will be more powerful than the person detaining him, which is an absurdity.

    “It is my submission that they are playing hanky-panky with this court. They are passing the buck and the buck must stop somewhere. It will stop when your lordship issues a warrant of arrest against the Director-General of DSS,” Onwugbufor said.

    In his contribution, Ozekhome said he supported the call for Daura’s arrest, and called for indefinite adjournment of the trial pending when Dasuki’s motion would be determined by the Court of Appeal.

    He said, “It is inconceivable that the DSS could not bring a person who has been in their custody for two years and who has not been proved to be violent. I think they are taking this court for a ride.

    “This court is not a table tennis court, or basketball court or lawn tennis court. The applicable section therefore, is section 243 and 244 of ACJA,” Ozekhome said.

    Shortly after, Tahir indicated that a representative of the DSS, Echika Owete, has appeared in court. He proceeded to read out a text message he said he got from the DSS’ Legal Adviser, stating that Dasuki said he would not come to court except by force, but that after much persuasion by DSS personnel, Dasuki agreed to appear in court on the next date.

    In a ruling, Justice Abang declined the request for the issuance of arrest warrant against Daura.

    He said the issue of Dasuki’s production should be handled administratively by the DSS and the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC).

    The judge said: “I cannot come to a conclusion that the Director-General of DSS has flouted the court order to produce Col. Sambo Dasuki (retd). I will give further opportunity to the DG of DSS to produce Col. Sambo Dasuki in court.”

    On the absence of Jonathan in court, the judge siad since ex-President was yet to be personally served with the witness summons issued on him by the court following an application by Metuh, the option left was to serve him through substituted means, as provided for in the ACJA.

    Justice Abang said if Metuh was interested in bringing Jonathan to court, he (Metuh), having requested for the ex-President as his witness, “ought to know what to do.”

    Earlier, Dasuki’s lawyer said his client’s appeal against the court’s ruling on October 25 declining jurisdiction over his motion for stay of execution of the witness summons, has been entered at the Court of Appeal, Abuja and given appealed number: CA/A/159C/B/17.

    He said his client has also filed a fresh application before the trial court for stay of all further proceedings in relation to the witness summons against his client pending when the Court of Appeal will determine his client’s motion for stay of execution of the witness summons.

    Justice Abang subsequently adjourned to today to rule on Dasuki’s motion and Jonathan’s application.

    The judge said the outcome of his ruling on Dasuki’s motion would determine whether or not to deliver a ruling on Jonathan’s motion.

    He said should Dasuki’s motion succeeds, it implied that the case would be adjourned as requested by the ex-NSA, but that if it fails the court would proceed to hear and deliver ruling on Jonathan’s application.

    He further restated his order that DSS should produce Dasuki in court today, but said the outcome of the ruling on the ex-NSA’s motion would determine if he (Dasuki) would testify today.

     

     

  • Metuh: Court summons Jonathan, Dasuki

    Metuh: Court summons Jonathan, Dasuki

    A FEDERAL High Court in Abuja has insisted that former President Goodluck Jonathan and ex-National Security Adviser (NSA) Mohammed Dasuki must appear today to testify for the defence in the ongoing trial of ex-spokesman of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), Olisa Metuh.

    Justice Okon Abang gave the directive yesterday despite the pending motion by Dasuki, challenging the witness summons issued on him and the uncertainty over whether or not Jonathan has been served with the subpoena issued by the court on Monday.

    At the resumption of proceedings in the trial of Metuh and his company, Destra Investment yesterday, Justice Abang took argument from lawyer to Dasuki, Ahmed Raji (SAN) and other lawyers in the case on the motion by ex-NSA.

    Arguing his client’s motion, Raji contended that there was no way Dasuki would testify in Metuh’s trial without implicating himself because the issues in the case and the three pending charges against him (Dasuki) were interlinked.

    Raji prayed the court to set aside the subpoena issued on Dasuki or suspend the execution of the court summon until he (Dasuki) was released from prison.

    He argued that his client’s long detention by the Department of State Service (DSS) since December 2015 has deprived Dasuki of ability to meaningful participate in Metuh’s trial

    Raji said the DSS continued to detain Dasuki despite being granted bail by three separate municipal courts and also an order to be released by ECOWAS Court.

    He said with his client’s continued detention, the ex-NSA had no access records that could enable him to give meaningful  evidence.

    Raji argued that from the nature of the charges instituted against Metuh, Dasuki could be said to be an alleged co-accomplice.

    He said the ex-NSA would “not be able to give evidence in the case without incriminating himself.”

    Raji contended that Dasuki, as an alleged accomplice, was a competent witness, but not a compellable witness.

    He stated that compelling Dasuki to give evidence would violate Section 36(2) of the Constitution, which guaranteed the right of a suspect to remain silent when arrested or detained.

    Raji said Dasuki was not served personally with the subpoena, as such, the service of the subpoena through the Director-General of DSS was invalid.

    Prosecuting lawyer, Sylvanus Tahir and lawyers representing Metuh and Destra, Onyechi Ikpeazu (SAN) and Tochukwu Onwugbufor (SAN) opposed Dasuki’s motion.

    They argued that the court lacked jurisdiction to hear the application.

    Tahir, Ikpeazu and Onwugbufor argued that granting the application by the court would amount to a violation of Section 287(2) of the Constitution, which they said prohibited a lower court from reviewing or varying the judgment of the Court of Appeal, which on September 29, ordered Justice Abang to sign the subpoena.

    On Raji’s argument that his client, being an alleged accomplice could implicate himself, Tahir argued that such contention was without basis.

    He said, “The applicant said he is an accomplice and his evidence will be self-incriminating

    “That argument is contrary to section 198 (1) of the Evidence Act.”

    On points of law, Raji said by virtue of the provisions of section 36 (11) of the Constitution “nobody standing trial shall be compelled to give evidence”.

    He added none of the respondents had challenged “the fact that we have no access to records and we are not in right mental state to give evidence in this case”.

    Justice Abang has reserved ruling on Dasuki’s motion till today.

    He  said: “The outcome of the ruling will determine which step to take about the first subpoena(issued on Dasuki), but the orders compelling His Excellency, former President Goodluck Jonathan, and Col. Sambo Dasuki, to appear in court on Wednesday, October 25, 2017 at the instance of the first defendant (Metuh) still stand.”

    Justice Abang had issued separate subpoenas on Jonathan and Dasuki upon applications by Metuh, who had requested the two men to testify in his defence in his ongoing trial.

    The judge confirmed that the subpoena on Jonathan was issue upon the receipt of Metuh’s application for the summon to be served on the ex-President at about 3.59p.m. on Monday.

    Justice Abang said: “In line with section 241(1) of Administration of Criminal Justice Act 2015, and having regard to the subsisting judgment of the Court of Appeal in the appeal, CA/A/159C/2017, between Olisa Metuh and Federal Republic of Nigeria  dated September 29, 2017 to the effect that it will be tantamount to violating the right of the first defendant (Metuh) to fair hearing not to sign the subpoena, I have no option  other than to sign a subpoena to compel former President Goodluck Jonathan to appear in court on September 25, 2017 (Wednesday)to give evidence at the instance of the first defendant,” he said.

    When asked if Jonathan has been served with the subpoena, a registrar of the court said the bailiff of the court was yet to serve the subpoena on Jonathan as at yesterday morning.

    Metuh and Destra are being prosecuted by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission on a seven-count charge of money laundering involving alleged cash transaction of $2 million and fraudulent receipt of  million meant for procurement of arms from the Office of the NSA.

    The EFCC alleged in the charges that Metuh and his firm used the N400 million for PDP’s campaign activities during the 2015 presidential election.

  • Fed Govt accuses Dasuki of plot to stall trial

    Fed Govt accuses Dasuki of plot to stall trial

    THE Federal Government has accused former National Security Adviser (NSA) Mohammed Dasuki of plotting to stall his trial for alleged illegal firearms possession and money laundering.

    Lead prosecuting lawyer in the case Dipo Okpeseyi (SAN) made this allegation yesterday while reacting to a fresh motion by Dasuki before a Federal High Court in Abuja.

    Dasuki, in his motion, wants the court to grant indefinite adjournment until the Court of Appeal determines the application he filed for an order staying proceedings at the trial court pending the determination of his appeal.

    The former NSA’s appeal is against an earlier decision of the trial court to allow some prosecution witnesses to testify behind a shield to be provided by the court.

    Arguing his counter-affidavit yesterday, Okpeseyi said Dasuki’s motion was an abuse of court process, vexatious and calculated to undermine the gains of both statute and case laws in criminal justice administration.

    He added that the motion was intended as “a smokescreen to delay trial, to clog and defeat the end of justice”.

    Okpseyi noted that the motion was premised on the defendant’s claim that there is a referral of some constitutional questions to the Court of Appeal for resolution, under Section 305 of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA).

    He argued that what the defendant did was to merely appeal an earlier decision of the court and not the referral of any issue to the Court of Appeal.

    Okpseyi contended that the ACJA prohibits such stay of proceedings being sought by the defendant in the guise of an indefinite adjournment.

    He cited Section 396(3) and (4) of the ACJA, to the effect that criminal trial be taken from day-to-day to run in tandem with the spirit of the Act.

    Okpeseyi also cited Section 306 of the ACJA, to the effect that the trial court shall not countenance an application/motion for stay of proceedings.

    Okpeseyi urged the court to dismiss Dasuki’s motion and allow the prosecution to commence trial.

    Dasuki’s lawyer, Ahmed Raji (SAN) said his client, has by his appeal, referred a constitutional question for the Appeal Court to determine.

    Raji said the meat of his client’s appeal was to test whether Section 232(3)(b) of the ACJA was in compliance with the provision of Section 36(4) of the 1999 Constitution

    He argued that the state of the nation’s laws was that once a motion like this is pending before the higher court, the lower court is enjoined to tarry a while to await the decision of the higher court on the motion

    This, he added, is to avoid a situation where a fait accompli is foisted on the higher court if the trial is allowed to go on and concluded.

    Raji said: “I urge this court to adjourn this matter to allow the Court of Appeal decide the motion pending before it.”

    The defence lawyer further argued that Section 305(1)(b) of ACJA cannot apply in the case, because the defendant had filed an appeal and a motion for state of proceedings before this court.

    The trial judge, Justice Ahmed Mohammed adjourned to November 15 for ruling or beginning of trial.

     

     

  • Supreme Court adjourns Dasuki’s suit till January 25

    Supreme Court adjourns Dasuki’s suit till January 25

    The Supreme Court on Thursday adjourned the hearing of a suit filed by former National Security Adviser, Col. Sambo Dasuki, till January 25, 2018.

    Dasuki is challenging his continued detention for alleged involvement in the sharing of $2billion arms procurement funds during ex-President Goodluck Jonathan’s administration.

    He was also accused of awarding phantom contracts for the purchase of helicopters, fighter jets, and ammunition meant for military campaign against the Boko Haram sect.

    The ex-NSA was arrested by the Department of State Service (DSS) on December 1, 2015 and has been in detention since that time.

     

     

  • Arms deals trial: I’ll face the consequences, says Dasuki

    Arms deals trial: I’ll face the consequences, says Dasuki

    A former National Security Adviser (NSA), Mr. Sambo Dasuki, has disclosed why he did not consider absconding in spite of the pressure of him to do so after he was implicated in a $2.1 billion arms procurement deals.

    He said he had to rebuff the pressure because he did not want to be a fugitive again.

    He also denied being one of the military officers who arrested President Muhammadu Buhari in August 1985 when Buhari was removed as military head of state.

    Dasuki made the disclosure in a book, An encounter with the Spymaster, written by Mallam Yushau Shuaib, the coordinator of PRNigeria, a military covert counter-insurgency media outfit.

    The ex-NSA said: “I can never be a fugitive after past Abacha’s attempt on my life in the 1990s. I will remain in Nigeria and face any consequences.”

    The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) had in January this year re-arraigned Dasuki and five others before the Federal Capital Territory High Court, Maitama.

    The other accused persons are a former governor of Sokoto State, Attahiru Bafarawa, and his son, Sagir; a former Director of Finance and Administration in the Office of the NSA, Shuaibu Salisu;  a former Minister of State for Finance, Bashir Yuguda as well as Sagir’s firm,  Dalhatu Investment.

    They were re-arraigned before Justice Baba Yusuf on 22 counts involving alleged diversion of N13 billion meant for purchase of arms.

    They were accused of criminal breach of trust, receiving stolen property and misappropriation of funds.

    The trial of Dasuki and others has been on and off in the last two years.

    Giving fresh insight into why the 2015 general election was postponed, the book stated: “It should be stated here that during the critical period of the war on terror, the Western powers deliberately refused to sell the required weapons and armaments to Nigeria to prosecute the war on flimsy excuses of human rights abuses.

    “When they embargoed the supply, the then government had to resort to Eastern Block for required arms and ammunition.

    “Though the arrival of the equipment was late, which necessitated the postponement of the 2015 election, the subsequent operations were successful.”

    In the book, Dasuki recalled how his path had crossed with the President in the military and politics.

    The ex-NSA explained how Buhari was informed about the 1983 Coup d’état which led to the sack of the democratically elected President, Alhaji Shehu Shagari.

    He said he and two young military officers (still alive) “travelled to Jos to brief Maj-Gen. Buhari, who was then the GOC of the 3rd Armoured Division, on the furtherance of the planning of 1983 coup which made Buhari the major beneficiary of the ouster of the elected President Shehu Shagari.”

    Asked why he participated in the coup d’état against Buhari in 1985, less than two years after the coup that brough him in, Dasuki said: “Gen. Buhari should know whom he should blame.”

    But he denied being among the officers that arrested Buhari as a military Head of State in the August 1985 putsch.

    He added: “I always respect and dignify my seniors and those in positions of authority, whether in service or after.

    “Though a young officer, I was reluctant to be among those that arrested him (Buhari). And I was not. I only met him afterwards at Bonny Camp with Lawal Rafindadi.

    “There is no way I could have maltreated him as being alleged in some quarters. I am glad most of the actors are still alive.”

    The detained former NSA dismissed having grudges with Buhari under any guise.

    The book said: “Dasuki narrated how he supported the campaign aspiration of Muhammadu Buhari for presidential elections in 2003, 2007 and 2011.

    “He mentioned the names of individuals who were also privy to his active involvement including respected Northern elements like Adamu Adamu (Minister of Education); Bashir Kurfi; Wada Maida (Buhari’s former Chief Press Secretary), Sule Hamman and Kabir Yusuf, among others.

    “He disclosed how he pleaded with Asiwaju Ahmed Tinubu in the presence of Chief Bisi Akande to accept Muhammadu Buhari as the joint presidential candidate of the defunct Action Congress of Nigeria (ACN) and former Congress for Progressive Change (CPC) in 2011.

    “Dasuki said he knelt down begging ‘Baba Bisi Akande’, who was then the chairman of CAN that, “Gen. Buhari is a man to be trusted.”

    He said he was prematurely retired from the Army because “he and some others confronted a former Head of State, the late Gen. Sani Abacha, over the June 12, 1993 presidential election which was won by the late Chief Moshood Kashimawo Abiola (MKO).”

    He said the persecution that followed his retirement forced him into exile where he “teamed up with opposition elements struggling for the return of democracy in Nigeria.”

  • Lai Mohammed on Dasuki, El-Zakzaky

    Lai Mohammed on Dasuki, El-Zakzaky

    T is indeed astonishing how Minister of Information, Lai Mohammed, wears ‘the other shoe’ very comfortably while ventilating his views on the constitution, rule of law, the obligations of government, and the personal freedoms of Nigerian citizens. Two Saturdays ago, during the 10th edition of the Lai Mohammed Ramadan Lecture Series held in his hometown, Oro, Kwara State, the minister simply put what he described as exigent national security issues far above the constitution of the Federal Republic. Mr Mohammed is a lawyer, some sort of activist, and a huge figure in the opposition during the Goddluck Jonathan presidency. Yet, he is apparently quite capable of arguing plausibly and engagingly both sides of an issue.

    His controversial view on the unending detention of both the former National Security Adviser (NSA), Sambo Dasuki, a retired colonel, and the leader of the Shi’a Islamic Movement in Nigeria, Ibraheem El-Zakzaky, gives a disturbing picture of Mr Mohammed as a politician, and paints a far more unflattering portrait of the Nigerian public/appointed official. The Information minister had been asked why the government he represents, and which he claims respects the rule of law, should continue to hold on to both Col Dasuki (retd.) and El-Zakzaky. His answer is a model for serving government officials, an answer he is certain to be reminded of many years after he has left office and resumed private life.

    Beginning with a specious comparison with the American democratic experience, Mr Mohammed argues that, “At every point in time, a government will make a hard decision between your personal liberty and national security. In the wake of 911, the US came with regulations that breached the personal rights of Americans and all of us because of national security.” It did not occur to Mr Mohammed that America anchored those responses on regulations backed by law, and that even then whatever laws and regulations proved inconsistent with the American constitution in any legal or security exigencies, no matter how deeply ramifying, were often successfully challenged in court.

    But Mr Mohammed was not through. Said he copiously, without mincing words: “In the case of both El Zakzaky and Dasuki, we are (also) talking about national security. Since the government would take responsibility for its actions, it cannot guarantee whether the former National Security Adviser will still stay in the country if granted bail…It is because the court order said we must release him (El-Zakzaky) within 45 days, rebuild his house, and there is nobody today within Kaduna State or anywhere else that wants to accept El-Zakzaky as a neighbour. So who do you release him to? For him to be killed? So, he is in protective custody with his family and this is one thing people don’t say. Like I said, a government faced with this kind of dilemma, so how much rule of law do you want to balance with national security? In the case of Dasuki, he transferred $1.2 billion in a day and he has refused to say where that money is (or who was) given, and as we speak today he has refused to tell.

    “Now, $1.2 billion is a lot of money. Who can guarantee that if he is released today he will not abscond? And with $1.2 billion at his disposal, is any government safe? It is good when people start talking about human rights and rule of law, but as a government that is responsible for the territorial integrity of this country, at times you have to take the heat because you want to ask yourself, if such an accused person were to disappear — and this is a country that we are still battling with terrorism, this is a country that we’re still battling with insurgency — and he links up with other enemies of government with an arsenal of $1.2 billion, would the people not blame us?  So, I think these are high profile cases. On the surface it appears like a government that violates rule of law, but in reality it is a dilemma for government because we must balance individual freedom with national security. But I will say overall that we’re not a government of impunity.”

    Not only is the government Mr Mohammed serving a government of impunity, contrary to his assertions, it is also one that violates the rule of law whether lightly or significantly. It is, however, clear that the Information minister was unable to convince even himself, and he had had to squirm considerably to justify the government’s flagrant lawlessness. In the same interview, he had suggested that the government was not engaged in media trial of suspects, arguing that the media were just performing their duties in reporting the government’s side of the story. That may be true; but by attempting to persuade the public as to the culpability of the suspects when the prosecution could not convince the courts amounts dangerously to self-help and media trial.

    In the case of Col. Dasuki (retd.), Mr Mohammed talks of a certain amount of money spent by the accused in a day, insinuating that the money could still be in his possession, perhaps for treasonable reasons. The accused is of course unable to respond. His lawyers had made their presentations before the courts and had secured bail for their client. Unable to halt that process, the government, as Mr Mohammed has said, prefers to present its case to the public directly via a one-sided appeal. In short, for the minister, it is in Nigeria’s security interest to keep the former NSA locked up, regardless of what the constitution and the courts say.

    But in the case of Sheikh El-Zakzaky, the Information minister was even less persuasive. He forgets that the case is on appeal, and he goes on to make other arguments. The Shiite leader is in protective custody, he says, because no state in Nigeria nor any neighbourhood is willing to co-exist with him. He, of course, dismisses the offer of some Shiite members to have him in their neighbourhoods. In announcing that the Shiite leader could be killed by unnamed enemies, the Information minister refuses to substantiate his suspicion and prefers to downplay the responsibility of the law enforcement agencies to protect citizens, no matter their vexing convictions. Nobody, not even Mr Mohammed himself, could have suspected that he was capable of that alarming ideological volte face.

    Irrespective of the spin he puts on these two frequently cited examples of the Buhari government’s arbitrariness, even the most ardent supporter of the president cannot help but argue that the federal government is indeed undermining the constitution. However, all the government is saying is that the constitutional subversion is justified. But whether justified or not, it would have been more interesting to ask Mr Mohammed what he thought of the 347 Shiite members killed by security forces in December 2015 and hastily and secretly buried in two mass graves. Mr Mohammed has proved his adeptness at defending anything, including the most atrocious assault on the rule of law — breaches both he and his party attacked vehemently before the last general elections — but it does not seem that even he would be capable of defending the mass killings of two Decembers ago. Perhaps, this column misjudges him badly.

    If the Information minister spoke out of conviction in defending some of the indefensible policies of the Buhari presidency, as a lawyer and activist, especially one who tended in those days to symbolise the best progressivism Nigeria could offer, then it would truly be tragic. But if he spoke out of duty to a government he schemed fervently to install in office and craved to serve, the tragedy is no less mitigated by the enthusiasm and passion with which he underscored his futile arguments. He ought to have been evasive at worst, or philosophical at best. More, as a minister, had he brought the courage and effrontery he has shown in supporting impunity to the service of his recanted moral and ideological convictions, and helped persuade his government to first make the requisite laws to undergird their anti-graft war, perhaps the opposition to their irresponsible methods would have been more restrained.

    The All Progressives Congress (APC) will not be in government for ever. Its current divisive and unconstitutional policies, which are being executed without a care in the world as if there is no tomorrow, will in the years to come return to haunt the party’s leaders. When that history catches up with them, as indeed it will sooner or later, they must remember that the other shoe is simply falling, and that they are lying on a bed of thorns they helped egregiously to make.