The Nation Newspaper

Tag: Federal High Court

  • FG rejects Diezani’s application for trial in Nigeria

    FG rejects Diezani’s application for trial in Nigeria

    The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) Monday opposed an application by former Minister of Petroleum Resources Mrs Diezani Alison-Madueke seeking to return to Nigeria to face trial.

    A Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN) Dele Bolgore, with whom she was charged, also urged the court not to grant it.

    The former minister, currently in London where she is being investigated for money laundering, is praying the Federal High Court in Lagos to order the Federal Government to facilitate her return to Nigeria to stand trial.

    She said if she would not be made a defendant in the case, her name should be removed from the charge.

    Mrs Alison-Madueke is asking for an opportunity to defend allegations against her in a charge filed against her, Belgore and a former minister of National Planning Prof Abubakar Suleiman.

    The prosecution said Alison-Madueke allegedly shared $115,010,000 (about N35billion) to different individuals in 36 states ahead of the 2015 general elections.

    EFCC accused Belgore and Suleiman of directly receiving N450million in cash from Alison-Madueke. They pleaded not guilty.

    Mrs Alison-Madiueke was not listed as a defendant, but was named in the charge as being as large.

    Arguing the application before Justice Rilwan Aikawa Monday, her lawyer Mr Onyechi Ikpeazu said his client was more or less a defendant in the case because there is a complaint against her.

    He said it was in the interest of justice and fair hearing to allow her to defend herself in four of the counts.

    “It is the fundamental right of the applicant that a criminal proceeding of this nature should not go on in her absence,” he said.

    Ikpeazu added that if EFCC does not wish to try or give her an opportunity to defend herself by listing her as a defendant, then the prosecution should expunge her name from the charge.

    “We have no objection if her name is extracted from the charge and the case goes on,” he added.

    The Senior Advocate cited a case at the court’s Abuja division involving the Federal Government and Olajide Omokore in which Mrs Alison-Madueke was mentioned in the charge but was also said to be at large.

    He said when she brought a similar application to be listed a defendant, Justice Nnamdi Dimgba struck out the count in which she was named.

    Ikpeazu urged Justice Aikawa to be persuaded by Justice Dimgba’s ruling.

    But, opposing the application, the prosecuting counsel Mr Rotimi Oyedepo said it was a “violent abuse of court processes.”

    “The application is frivolous and is intended to annoy the parties,” he said.

    Oyedepo argued that based on Section 269 of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act, the prosecution can only amend a charge by adding to the counts or reducing them, not adding a defendant.

    He said if any amendment is allowed at this stage, two witnesses having been already called, the trial would start de novo (afresh).

    To him, that would occasion a miscarriage of justice.

    Besides, Oyedepo said Mrs Alison-Madueke was not even within the court’s jurisdiction having admitted in her application that she was in London.

    The EFCC lawyer said the former minister was given an opportunity before trial commenced to answer the charge, but she allegedly escaped.

    “Immediately she got to know about the investigation of this case, she absconded from Nigeria. Upon realising that she is in London, we made effort to meet her interview her there.

    “But she has always refused to meet with our team members. Her lawyer in London, one Mr John Beans, said the team would not be permitted to meet her because she’s outside jurisdiction,” Oyedepo said.

    The lawyer said the application was, therefore, “misconceived and belated”.

    According to him, apart from the prosecution who would suffer avoidable delay, the defendants would also be prejudiced.

    Oyedepo said the trial should be allowed to go on without her, adding that whenever she returns to Nigeria, she would be charged.

    “This application is intended to delay this case,” Oyedepo said.

    Belgore’s lawyer Mr Ebun Shofunde (SAN) also opposed the application, saying Mrs Alison-Madueke was not a “necessary party” to the case.

    “Without the applicant being a party, what the court will determine is the guilt or innocence of the first and second defendants.

    “The court does not require the presence of the applicant to determine their guilt or innocence,” he said.

    Sofunde added that it would be “unjust” for a trial that started in February to begin all over again when the applicant had no excuse for waiting so long.

    “I urge the court to dismiss the application,” he said.

    Replying on points of law, Ikpeazu said the fact that Alison-Madueke was just bringing the application was “secondary”.

    He said there was nothing to show that she was aware of the charge, and insisted that “the applicant is a defendant because there’s a complaint against her.”

    Justice Aikawa will decide the application on Wednesday.

     

     

  • Illegal detention: Court awards N40m damages against el-Rufai, police 

    Illegal detention: Court awards N40m damages against el-Rufai, police 

    A Federal High Court in Abuja has awarded N40million damages against Kaduna State Governor, Nasir el-Rufai, the Inspector General of Police (IGP) and two others over the unlawful detention of the promoter of Lagos-based record company, Chocolate City Group, Audu Maikori.

    Justice John Tsoho ordered the award yesterday in a judgment in a fundamental rights suit brought by Maikori.

    Justice Tsoho held that the arrest and detention of Maikori between February 17 and 18, 2017, and again March 10 and 13, 2017 by the police, on instigation of the Kaduna Government was unlawful.

    The judge equally ordered the respondents (el-Rufai, Kaduna State’s Attorney General, Police Commissioner in Kaduna and IGP) to pay N1,430 to the applicant as the cost of instituting the suit.

    Justice Tsoho said the judgment should not serve as a bar on Miakori’s ongoing trial before a court in Kaduna.

    He said the police possess the constitutional power to legitimately arrest suspects for allegedly violating law and order on the cyberspace.

    Maikori was arrested on allegations of posting “inciting” tweets alleging the killing of some Southern Kaduna students by Fulani herdsmen.

    The details of the tweets later turned out to be false, but Maikori claimed he obtained information from his driver.

    He later expressed regret over the posts and retracted them.

    The police subsequently obtained an order of arrest from a Magistrate’s in Kaduna with which the arrested him in Lagos on February 17, flew him to Abuja where they detained him and released him on bail on February 18.

    Justice Tsoho granted 14 out of the 25 prayers sought by the applicant.

    The judge said Maikori’s arrest in Lagos was unlawful, the police having failed to register the arrest obtained from a magistrate’s court in Kaduna in any court in Lagos where it effected on the businessman.

    He said: “The arrest was improper, irregular and wrongful. By necessary implication, the arrest was unlawful despite being released after 24 hours.”

    The court uoheld that argument by applicant’s lawyer, Miss Gloria Ballason, that Maikori was arrested and detained between March 10 and 13 even when the police was aware of his respiratory health challenge, thereby violating his right to life and dignity.

    He said, “By virtue of exhibit 3 (medical report) an affidavit evidence, the police was made aware of the health challenge of the applicant. This fact was not controverted by all the respondents.

    “The attitude of the respondents threatened the applicant’s right to life. Right to life and human liberty includes right to human dignity and other things that make life worth living.

    “Under Section 46(1) of 1999 Constitution, as amended, the court stated that anticipated infringement of fundamental right is protected, adding that “it is appropriate for applicant to seek redress in court.

    “This court found and held that the conduct of police infringes on the applicant’s right to life, liberty, dignity, freedom, movement as enshrined in Sections 34, 35, 40 and 43 of the Constitution.

    “The judgement is without prejudice to the offences that the applicant is standing trial.

    “Social media cannot be  without social responsibility. It would amount to an invitation to anarchy to say that the cyber space is beyond control.”

    The judge noted that the Cyber Crime Act  was enacted for the control and regulation of the cyberspace.

    He disagreed with the position canvassed by some friends of the court (amicus curiae) to the effect that the social medial use should be left unhindered.

    The judge said there must be law and order in the cyber space.”

     

     

  • Court dismisses suit seeking to compel MTN to pay N1.04trn fine

    Court dismisses suit seeking to compel MTN to pay N1.04trn fine

    A Federal High Court in Abuja Friday rejected a suit seeking to compel MTN Nigeria Communications Limited to pay into the federation account N1.40trillion, being the fine that was imposed on it by the Nigerian Communications Commission (NCC).

    Justice Babatunde Quadri, in a judgment Friday, also refused to issue an order of mandamus to compel NCC to perform its statutory obligation under section 45(1) (a) (b) and (c) of the Nigeria Communications Act, by revoking MTN’s operation license, pending when it paid the fine.

    The judgment was on a suit marked FHC/ABJ/CS/448/2016, filed by a member of the House of Representatives, Raphael Igbokwe and Emmanuel Njoku, who said the sued for themselves and on behalf of “Nigerians Against Exploitation By Telecommunications Operators.”

    The plaintiffs had, among others, queried the powers of the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of the Federation (AGF) and the Minister of Communications Technology to reduce the N1.04trillion fine imposed on MTN to N780billion.

    Defendants in the suit were the NCC, MTN, the AGF and the Minister of Communication Technology.

    Justice Quadri upheld preliminary objections filed by the defendants against the suit, to the effect that the suit was statute barred.

    He upheld their contention that 30 days had elapsed before the plaintiffs approached the court to challenge the fine they said was reduced since 2015.

    The judge said the plaintiffs did not fulfil necessary condition precedent to the filling of such suit, and that they failed to exhaust all other remedies that were provided in sections 86, 87 and 88 of the NCC Act and Order 34 of the Federal High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules.

    He said the plaintiffs ought to have applied for statement of reason from the NCC, request for a review of the decision of the commission within 30 days, and specify reasons why they wanted MTN to be compelled to pay the fine in full.

    Justice Quadri said it was only after the conditions were met that the plaintiffs could apply to court for a judicial review of the decision.

    The plaintiffs through their lawyer, Okere Kingdom, prayed the court to among other things, determine the following questions:

    “Whether or not the Hon. Minister of Justice/Attorney General of the Federation and the Minister of Communications Technology have powers to amend, alter, adjust or vary any provisions of a delegated legislation or any other law validly made by the National Assembly, or any rules, regulations and orders validly made by any delegated legislature pursuant to an Act of the National Assembly.

    “Whether or not the National Assembly of Nigeria or any Arm of the National Assembly has the constitutional powers to constitute an investigative panel and to summon any government official, to inquire into the circumstances surrounding the alteration, variation and reduction of the fine lawfully imposed on MTN Nigeria Communications Ltd by NCC, which fine was imposed pursuant to delegated powers conferred on the NCC by an Act of the National Assembly.

    “Whether or not MTN Nigeria Communications Ltd has breached section 146(1) and (2) of the NCC Act and sections 19(1) and 20 (1) and (2) of the NCC (Registration of Telephone Subscribers Regulations) 2011, by intentionally and willfully failing to disconnect and register all unregistered subscribers on its network as stipulated in the Act.”

    Igbokwe stated, in a affidavit, that the House of Reps had by a motion moved by Hon. Ehiozuwa Johnson captioned ‘need to investigate the payment made by MTN on the fine levied by the NCC’, constituted a committee to investigate issues, circumstances and motives behind “the huge reduction of the N1.40trillion fine imposed on MTN.

    He stated that controversies surrounding the reduction of the fine was a matter of public interest for which Nigerians deserved to know, adding that both Malami and Shittu refused to appear before the House of Reps investigative committee, “thereby denying Nigerians oppurtunity to know the said circumstances and rationale leading to the reduction of the fine”.

  • Malabu Oil: FG begs for time to produce Adoke, Etete, others in court

    Malabu Oil: FG begs for time to produce Adoke, Etete, others in court

    The Federal Government Thursday urged a Federal High Court in Abuja to accord it more time to produce for trial, former Minister of Justice and Attorney General of the Federation (AGF) and others charged in the controversial $1.1billion Mababu Oil deal.

    The others are: former Petroleum Minister, Duazia Loya Etete (aka Dan Etete); businessman, Aliyu Abubakar;  Shell Nigeria Exploration Production Company, ENI, Malabu Oil and Gas Limited, Rocky Top Resource Limited, Imperial Union Limited, Novel Properties and Development Company Limited, Group Construction Limited and Megatech Engineering Limited.

    Adoke and Etete, who are said to be currently outside the country, are accused, in the charge before the court, of complicity in the massive fraud associated with the transfer of OPL 245 earlier held by Malabu Oil to Shell and Agip Oil.

    In the charges filed on behalf of the Federal Government by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), the defendants are also accused of defrauding the government of $1.1 billion in a fraudulent transfer of OPL 245 ownership.

    When the case was mentioned Thursday, lawyer to the FG, Jonson Ojogbane told the court that the state was still unable to extradite Adoke and Etete for the purpose of producing them and others for arraignment.

    Ojogbane sought for more time for the government to conclude its on-going effort to have Adoke and Etete brought back to the country.

    Ojogbane said: “My Lord, my situation has not improved since the last time I came to court.

    “The process of getting the defendants to appear in court to face arraignment is very cumbersome, but it is ongoing.

    “We are hoping that very soon the process will be concluded,” he said.

    In view of Ojogbane’s request, which was not opposed by other lawyers in the case, Justice John Tsoho adjourned to February 15 next year.

    Ojogbane had, at the previous proceedings on June 13, told the court that the government has initiated the process of extraditing the two former ministers for the purpose of the trial.

    Ojogbane said “the Federal Government is doing everything within its power to bring them back to Nigeria to face trial.

    “The EFCC wants to ensure a holistic approach to the case and we want to ensure that those who are charged are tried together. All we need is some time.

    “If we are able to do this, then we’ll continue. Otherwise we take a major decision to see how we can proceed with those available for the trial.”

    When the case was first mentioned on April 3, Ojogbane told the court that the prosecution was having difficulties serving Adoke and Etete with the charges because they are outside the jurisdiction of the court.

    He applied for a warrant of arrest against both ex-ministers to compel them to attend court to answer to charges, an application Justice Tsoho declined on the grounds that the two have not been arraigned before the court.

  • How Badeh’s wife, two sons escaped to US – witness

    How Badeh’s wife, two sons escaped to US – witness

    A Federal High Court in Abuja heard Wednesday how the wife of former Chief of Air Staff (COAS), Alex Badeh and his two sons escaped to the United States on learning that they were being investigated in relation to alleged fraud involving Badeh.

    A prosecution witness, Abubakar Madaki, who testified at Wednesday’s proceedings in the Bdeh’s trial gave details of how the allegations against Badeh was investigated.

    Madaki, an investigator with the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) was led in evidence by lead prosecuting lawyer, Rotimi Jacobs (SAN) as the prosecution’s 18th witness.

    He gave Badeh’s wife’s name as Mary and his two sons as Alex Badeh (Jr) and Kam.

    He said his team of investigators was able to link some properties allegedly bought by Badeh through proxies to him from the movement of funds from the Nigerian Air Force’s account to the sellers.

    The witness said, “As of today, the subsequent buyers have not registered their interests.

    “Since the subsequent buyers have not registered their interests, as I earlier stated, we got the occupants of the property and those working on the projects, who took us to the final owners of the properties, because the properties have gone to three owners from the original owners.

    “It was the last owners of the properties that we traced the funds from the Nigerian Air Force to, via the agents.”

    He said Badeh’s  wife and two of his children  were being investigated for offences with which the ex-Chief of Air Staff, was charged.

    He said the three of them, however, escaped to the United States of America before investigation was concluded.

    He said all attempts to get them arrested turned out to be futile.

    He said, “At the initial stage, when we started investigation, we invited Alex Badeh (Jnr.) (Badeh’s son) who lives in 19 Kumasi Crescent, Abuja, one of the properties, among the properties earlier mentioned.

    “He happened to be a son of the first defendant (Badeh). He claimed to be a tenant in that property and since investigation was ongoing at the preliminary stage, we allowed him to go to come back when we had enough issues to question him about.

    “He left and never came back. We later got to know that he has left the country for America

    “We were also looking for Mary Iya Badeh, the wife of the first defendant, who is one of the directors in the second defendant (Iyalikam Nigeria Limited).

    “The second defendant (Iyalikam) had received so much funds from the alleged funds we are investigating.

    “She too, according to investigation has left the country for America.

    “Kam Badeh (another of Badeh’s son)  is one of the directors in one of the companies.

    “We have gone round the locations that we had information that he does business, but we are unable to get him.

    “Since the information was that they left through the International Airport, we wrote a letter to the Nigerian Immigration Service and the  Department of Security Service to watch-list them.

    “But We have not been able to get them,” the witness said.

    He said when his team concluded investigation in the case, it “discovered that the first defendant (Badeh) and his wife had earlier incorporated a company Iyalikam Nigeria Limited” in whose accounts they allegedly diverted the Nigerian Air Force’s funds.

    He added “The first defendant was Chief of Air Staff and subsequently the Chief of Defence of Staff. Funds from the Nigerian Air Force  were being diverted to the second defendant (Iyalikam).

    “We also discovered that N558,200,000 was being set aside for the first defendant from the NAF account.

    “Part of the funds were being exchanged into dollars and handed over to the first defendant. Some fractions of the funds were being distributed as directed by the first defendant.

    “The major part of the funds was exchanged into dollars and was used to acquire choice properties in Abuja by the director of finance, Salisu  Yishau.

    “The part of the funds were moved to Right Builders owned by PW4, Mustapha Yerima.”

    The witness als gave details about how a cash sum of $1m was found in Badeh’s residence at 6, Ogun River, Off Danube Crescent.

    “The property was purchased by the defendants with the funds we are investigating.

    “We found in the course of searching the premises $1m which was believed to be part of the alleged funds we are investigating.

    He also said $900,000, allegedly part of the diverted NAF’s funds, was deposited in Badeh’s accounts with the First Bank between 2012 and 2013.

    He said, “A total $900,000 between November  2012 to October or November 2013 was found deposited in the account. The money is believed to be part of funds we are investigating.”

    At a point, the prosecuting lawyer, Jacobs sought the court’s permission to play a video recording of how the EFCC allegedly recovered $1m a property said to be owned  Badeh in Abuja.

    When the court granted his request, Jacobs said he would bring another witness through whom he would play the video recording.

    During cross-examination by Badeh’s lawyer, Lasun Sanusi (SAN), the witness admitted that he (Madaki) did not personally participate in the purchase of the properties under investigation.

    On how funds allegedly diverted from NAF’s account were changed to dollars and eventually ended up in Badeh’s hand, he said the his team got to know about it during investigation.

    Earlier, in a ruling, Justice Okon Abang admitted as exhibits title documents of a N650m Abuja property  sold by Governor Ayodele Fayose of Ekiti State to buyers from who Badeh allegedly bought the property, suing a proxy.

    Justice Abang admitted the documents as exhibits after dismissing Badeh’s objection to their admission.

    Badeh and his firm, Iyalikam Nigeria Limited are being prosecuted by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) on a 10-count charge of money laundering, in which they were accused of fraudulently removing about N3.97bn from the account of the Nigerian Air Force.

    They are also accused of using the money to buy and develop landed properties in Abuja for Badeh and two sons between January and December 2013.

    The documents admitted by the court’s ruling yesterday include the deeds of assignment between Fayose and Tony O. Ezekiel dated December 12, 2009, and the Certificate of Occupancy bearing the governor’s name.

    Other documents admitted as exhibits included a letter dated March 4, 2016 with attachment sent by the Lands Department of the Federal Capital Territory Administration in response to EFCC’s request; a reply dated May 5, 2016 by the Abuja Geographic Information; letter by the Solicitor-General of the Federation and Permanent Secretary of the Federal Ministry of Justice.

    The prosecution’s 4th witness, Mustapha Yerima, who testified on May 23, 2016,  Mustapha told the court  how a plot of land in Abuja worth N650m and which was originally owned by Fayose was purchased by Badeh for the construction of a shopping mall at a cost of N1.2bn.

    Yerima, a contractor and Managing Director of Life Builders Technology Limited, Said the shopping mall is located along Amino Kano Crescent, in Abuja.

    He said Badeh eventually acquired the land from the third buyer.

    Yerima said he reached a bargain with Badeh to build the mall for N1.2bn.

    He said that a former Director of Finance and Account of the Nigerian Air Force, Air Commodore Aliyu Yishau (retd), who had earlier tes‎tified as the first prosecution witness (PW1), was the middle man between him and Badeh.

    The trial resumes on November 1.

  • Metuh’s trial: Court gives five days for service of summons on Jonathan

    Metuh’s trial: Court gives five days for service of summons on Jonathan

    A Federal High Court in Abuja Wednesday gave the bailiff of the court five days within which to effect personal service of subpoena (witness summons) issued on former President Goodluck Jonathan to testify as defence’s witness in the trial of ex-spokesman of the People’s Democratic Party (PDP) Olisa Metuh.

    Justice Okon Abang said this in a ruling on the arguments lawyers to parties on what further steps the court should take in view of the absence of Jonathan and foremr National Security Adviser (NSA), Mohammed Dasuki in court yesterday.

    The court had on Tuesday adjourned the criminal trial to yesterday for Jonathan and Dasuki, subpoenaed on the request of Metuh, to appeal and testify as defence’s witnesses.

    At the resumption of proceedings Wednesday, it was discovered that neither Jonathan nor Dasuki was in court.

    While there was evidence that Dasuki had been served with the witness summons, the court noted that its bailiff was not yet able to serve the witness summons issued on Jonathan on him.

    When asked what further steps should be taken, prosecuting lawyer, Sylvester Tahir urged the court to order that substituted service of the summons be effected on Jonathan since an attempt at personal service has failed.

    As it relates, to Dasuki, Tahir asked the court to apply the provision of Section 246(1)(a) of Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA).

    Tahir said: “There was a report on Monday the Dasuki has been served on October 18. Today is the return date. The witness that has been served is not here.

    “Section 246(1)(a) of ACJA has addressed the situation at hand. It says A witness, who refuses or neglect without reasonable excuse, to attend court in response to a witness summons is liable to a summary conviction and sentencing to fine of N10, 000 or imprisonment of 2months.

    “What we are saying is that there is no reasonable excuse why this witness is not in court having been duly served with the summons

    “Since it is a continuous trial, the court may make further order communicating the next adjourned date to the Director General of Department of State Services (DSS).

    “An order has been made by this honourable court, but is has not been obeyed. The court has the inherent power to direct information on the case to the witness summons through the agency of government who is detaining him.

    “The court should ask that he be produced at the next adjourned date. He should come to court and say why he cannot testify, we should not speculate. An order for his production should be made,” Tahir said.

    When asked by the court, as the lawyer to the complainant what steps he has taken to ensure that an agency of Federal Government (DSS) comply with the order made by Court of Appeal on September 29 this year, Tahir said he had reported to his employer, the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC).

    Tahir said: “Speaking truthfully, we applied for the judgment of the Court of Appeal. I personally gave it to the Chief Registrar of this court as a way of facilitating the attendance of the witness at these proceedings.

    “I also submitted certified true copies of the judgment and enrolled order to the management of the EFCC and gave them adequate briefing. I cannot be sure what steps the EFCC management has taken, if any, by way of liaising with the DSS,” Tahir said.

    Responding, lawyer for the defence, Onyechi Ikpeazu (SAN)  objected to the position canvassed by Tahir.

    They urged the court to ensure that more attempt were made to serve Jonathan personally before the option of substituted means could be considered.

    Ruling, Justice Abang agreed with the submissions of the defence lawyers and directed that further attempt should be made at serving Jonathan personally, failing which the option of substituted means could be explored.

    On Dasuli, he directed that the issue should be handled administratively since the case was being prosecuted by an agency of the Federal Government (the EFCC) and Dasuki was being held by another agency of the Federal Government (DSS).

    He said the court would be unable to make meaningful progress where Dasuki and Jonathan fail to attend court as directed.

    The judge said: “Col. Dasuki (retd), His Excellency, Goodluck Jonathan are not in court Wednesday to give evidence in this matter.

    “As regards Col. Dasuki (retd), there is proof of service. The order of the Court of Appeal in appeal number CA/A/159C/17, has been complied with by serving the subpoena on the Department of State Services to produce Col. Dasuki today. No reason has been offered and he is not produced in court today.

    “As regards the production of Col. Dasuki in court today, at the subsequent hearing of this matter, this will be addressed administratively.

    “From the judgment of the Court of Appeal dated September 29, 2017, it is stated that Col. Dasuki is in the custody of the Department of State Service, which is an organ or an integral part of the Federal Government of Nigeria.

    “Learned counsel, representing the Federal Government of Nigeria in this matter must persuade his client, that is, the Federal Government of Nigeria, to produce Col. Sambo Dasuki (retd) in court at the next adjourned date, failing which it will be extremely difficult for the court to make progress in this matter.

    “As regards His Excellency, Dr. Goodluck Jonathan, who is not in court today, it is on record that he is yet to be served the witness summon.

    “The court cannot apportion blame to him for his failure to be in court today.

    “It is my humble view that service of court process on the witness or a party goes to the root of adjudication, absence of which will nullify proceedings, no matter how well conducted.

    “It is not sufficient that the bailiff of the court made only one attempt to serve him with the witness summon.

    “On this, I agree entirely with the learned counsel for the 1st defendant (Metuh), Dr. O. Ikpeazu (SAN), that it cannot be an exercise of due diligence on the part of the bailiff to have His Excellency, Dr. Goodluck Jonathan served with the witness summon on only one attempt.

    “The bailiff is hereby directed to make further attempts in effecting personal service of the witness summon on His Excellency, Dr. Goodluck Jonathan.

    “Although the law does not state the number of attempts to be made in effecting personal service, one attempt, in my view, is not sufficient.

    “The bailiff of the court is hereby given five days from today to effect personal service of the subpoena on His Excellency, Dr. Goodluck Jonathan.

    “Thereafter, the law will take it course. However, if personal service cannot be effected, it can be served by substituted means.

    “For this purpose, the bailiff, under Section 124 of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA), is an agent of the first defendant, Olisa Metuh, for the purpose of service of process on His Excellency, Dr. Goodluck Jonathan.

    “The bailiff is the agent of the first defendant for the purpose of substituted service. This is because the first defendant elected to call him (Jonathan), not the court.

    “If personal service cannot be effected, it is only reasonable that the first defendant has a duty to apply for leave to serve His Excellency, Dr. Goodluck Jonathan by substituted means. I so hold.”

    The judge then scheduled both Jonathan and Dasuki to appear in court on October 31.

    He said: “In the light of the above, the matter will be adjourned, again, at the instance of the first defendant, to enable the subpoenaed witnesses to be in court.

    “This matter is therefore adjourned until October 31 to enable the subpoenaed witness – Col. Sambo Dasuki (retd.) and His Excellency, Dr. Goodluck Jonathan to give evidence at the instance of the first defendant.”

    In an earlier ruling, Justice Abang struck out the motion filed by Dasuki, seeking the setting aside of the subpoena issued on him.

    Dasuki had argued that he was not in the right frame of mind to testify in the case because he has been held in custody since December 2015 and could no longer remember all that happened while he was in office.

    He also argued that there was no way he could testify in Metuh’s trial without implicating himself, because issues in the Metuh case were related to those for which he (Dasuki) had been charged in three pending cases.

    In his ruling, the judge said: “The court as presently constituted only performed its statutory duty as provided under section 287(2) of the 1999 Constitution.

    “The court has no jurisdiction to make an order that seeks to set aside the subpoena or in any way to suspend the execution of the subpoena not being the court that made the order in the first place.

    “From the arguments of the learned counsel for the applicant, it seems to me that the applicant is dissatisfied with the order of the Court of Appeal compelling him to appear before this court to give evidence at the instance of the first defendant.

    “If that is the position, the applicant, Col. Dasuki (retd.), is expected to know what to do and where to go, definitely not to come to this court to file this kind of application.

    “This application has the tendency of asking this court to review the judgment of the Court of Appeal. This is legally impossibility.

    “Doing so will amount to judicial anarchy. The subpoena was issued pursuant to the judgment of the Court of Appeal under section 287(2) of the Constitution.

    “A judicial action of the Court of Appeal cannot be subject to review by the Federal High Court,” Justice Abang said.

    He noted that Dasuki, not being a party to the Metuh trial, he ought to have sought and obtained the leave of court before filing the application.

    Justice Abang said: “The court only exercised its statutory powers under Section 287(2) of the Constitution and also in compliance with the judgment of the Court of Appeal delivered on September 29.

    “I have no jurisdiction to hear this application on merit. There is no live issue capable of being resolved on the merits.

    “The application is incompetent and same is accordingly struck out,” Justice Abang said.

    The EFCC is prosecuting Metuh and his company, Destra Investments Limited, on seven counts of money laundering involving alleged cash transaction of $2m and fraudulent receipt of N400m meant for procurement of arms from the Office of the NSA.

    The prosecution alleged in the charges that Metuh and his firm used the N400m for PDP’s campaign activities during the 2015 presidential election.

    The sum of N400m was alleged to be “part of the proceeds of unlawful activities” of the immediate past NSA, Dasuki.

    Read: Metuh to call Jonathan as witness in N400m, $2m alleged fraud trial

  • Court insists Jonathan, Dasuki should testify in Metuh’s trial

    Court insists Jonathan, Dasuki should testify in Metuh’s trial

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

    Justice Okon Abang gave the directive Tuesday 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.

    While 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 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 said, “In sum total, my lord, up till this morning, all these facts are not controverted by the respondents.

    “He was the National Security Adviser from 2012 to 2015, almost four years, and he treated many files, but he has been in detention for two years.

    “Giving evidence is something that has do with state of the mind and recollection of events. The detention is not lawful and all the circumstances combine to completely dis-orient him.

    “Most importantly my noble lord, he has no access to documents which he can make use of.

    “He is willing and ready to assist the court but he is disabled and unable, that is why we are appealing in Prayer 2 that the court should sympathetically suspend the operation of this subpoena pending his release from detention. The law does not and cannot command what is impossible.”

    Raji further argued that from the nature of 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 Raju’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 Metuh’s application for the summona to be served on the ex-President at about 3.59pm on Monday.

    Justice Abang said, “Indeed, at the close of business yesterday (Monday) being October 23, 2017 precisely at about 3.59pm, the registrar forwarded to the court in chamber a subpoena to compel former President Goodluck Jonathan to appear in court to testify a the instance of the first defendant (Metuh).

    “Therefore, 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 Tuesday morning.

    The registrar said the bailiff could not be reached after the judge signed the subpoena late on Monday.

    He said the bailiff had therefore promised to pick up the subpoena for service on Jonathan on Tuesday.

    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 $2m and fraudulent receipt of N400m meant for procurement of arms from the Office of the NSA.

    The EFCC alleged in the charges that Metuh and his firm used the N400m for PDP’s campaign activities during the 2015 presidential election.

    The N400m was alleged to be “part of the proceeds of an unlawful activities” of the immediate past NSA, Dasuki.

    Witnesses so far called by Metuh (who is currently conducting his defence have insisted that Jonathan authorised  the N400m paid to the ex-spokesperson for the PDP from the Office of the NSA  in November 2014, the money being part of the case against Metuh.

    The defence legal team had insisted that given the roles which Jonathan and Dauski played in the N400m transaction, both men were needed as witnesses in the case.

  • Hearing stalled in bank’s debt suit against Oduah

    Hearing stalled in bank’s debt suit against Oduah

    Hearing in a suit by Sterling Bank Plc against Senator Stella Oduah and her firm, Sea Petroleum and Gas Company Ltd, was stalled Thursday at the Federal High Court in Lagos due to Justice Ayokunle Faji’s absence.

    The suit, which was adjourned until November 8, was earlier adjourned for hearing of all pending applications, but the judge was said to be on an official assignment.

    The bank said Oduah and her firms owe it $16.4million and N100.5 million.

    The matter was initially before Justice Abdulaziz Anka before it was transferred to Justice Faji

    Justice Anka had in March restrained Senator Oduah and Sea Petroleum and Gas from making any withdrawals from its account and those of three other companies in 21 banks.

    The other firms affected by the order are Sea Shipping Agency Ltd, Rotary Engineering Services Ltd and Tour Afrique Company Ltd.

    The order followed an affidavit deposed to by Sterling Bank’s business manager Mr Segun Akinsanya.

    The bank said it granted a lease /Cabotage Vessel Finance Facility (CVFF) to Sea Petroleum and Gas  to finance one unit 5,000 MT tanker vessel..

    According to the bank, the loan was secured by an unconditional personal guarantee by Princess Oduah.

    The bank said the guarantee was backed by a statement of her net worth, legal mortgage of two properties worth N135 billion, and a power of attorney.

    According to the bank, between June 27, 2013, Sea Petroleum requested and was granted additional loan of $450,000 for post-delivery expenses, as well as $993,000 to meet the requisite conditions in securing the tanker’s release.

    Akinsanya said despite several reminders and demands, the defendants failed to liquidate the indebtedness which culminated to $16.4million and about N100.5million as at last November.

    He said there was an imminent risk of the defendants dissipating the companies’ assets if not restrained.

    The bank, therefore, urged the court to grant the order restraining Oduah and other directors of the companies from withdrawing from their accounts in all the banks pending the determination of the debt recovery suit.

    Oduah and her companies have urged the court to discharge the order.

  • ‘How ex-aide laundered N5.1b for Patience Jonathan’

    ‘How ex-aide laundered N5.1b for Patience Jonathan’

    The Federal High Court in Lagos has heard how a former Senior Special Assistant to ex-President Gooluck Jonathan on Domestic Affairs Dr Waripamo-Owei Dudafa allegedly laundered about N5.1billion for the former president’s wife Patience.

    The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) arraigned Dudafa and Iwejuo Joseph Nna (alias Taiwo A. Ebenezer and Olugbenga Isaiah) before Justice Mohammed Idris on 23-counts of conspiracy and concealment of crime proceeds.

    They are on trial for alleged conspiracy to conceal proceeds of crime amounting to over N1.6billion on June 11, 2013, among others.

    A prosecution witness, Orji Chukwuma, in his testimony on Tuesday, said Dudafa allegedly used different companies to fraudulently launder various sums of money to the tune of N5.1 billion.

    The EFCC operative said a Bereau de Change operator Murtala Abubakar admitted to have collected several millions in dollars from Dudafa.

    “We discovered, in the course of our investigation, that Abubakar was directed to pay the various sums of money into different accounts provided by Dudafa,” the witness said.

    Chukwuma, led in evidence by the prosecuting counsel Rotimi Oyedepo, said Mrs Jonathan gave the money to Dudafa at the Aso Rock Villa.

    The former aide, the witness said, allegedly used some companies to launder the money.

    They are ABY Resources Limited, Avalon Global Property Development Company Limited, Pluto Property and Investment Company Limited, Ibejige Services Limited and DeJakes Fast Food & Restaurant Nigeria Limited.

    Chukwuma said the defendant ware-housed and managed the money through the companies.

    The court also heard that Dudafa did not declare his interest in the companies in his Asset Declaration Form.

    According to the witness, the monies found in his accounts at two new generation banks were proceeds of crime.

    Dudafa, through his lawyer, applied to the court to release his international passport temporarily to enable him go for a medical appointment outside the country.

    He claimed that he suffers from spinal cord dislocation, which he said he sustained while he was at EFCC’s detention.

    But, Oyedepo urged the court not to grant the application, saying EFCC had written to a government hospital to determine whether Dudafa could be treated in Nigeria but was yet to get a response.

    Justice Idris adjourned till October 24 for hearing of the application to travel.

    Trial will continue on November 14 and 15.

  • Agbakoba to court: Disqualify Buhari as Petroleum Minister

    Agbakoba to court: Disqualify Buhari as Petroleum Minister

    A former President of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) Mr Olisa Agbakoba has asked a Federal High Court in Abuja to disqualify President Muhammadu Buhari from holding office as Petroleum Minister.

    Agbakoba prayed the court to declare that by Section 138 of the 1999 Constitution, the holder of the office of President of Nigeria cannot simultaneously, legally hold another executive office, such as that of a petroleum minister.

    The court is yet to fix a date for hearing of the suit.

    Read Also: FG lauded by Ekweremadu on 41Km Enugu-Ebonyi road rehabilitation