The Nation Newspaper

Tag: former National Security Adviser (NSA)

  • Dasuki stalls commencement of trial-in-absentia 

    …Files fresh application

     

    The planned commencement of the trial of former National Security Adviser (NSA), Sambo Dasuki in his absence was stalled on Tuesday owing to a fresh application he filed, querying the propriety of the trial.

    Justice Ahmed Mohammed of the Federal High Court, Abuja had, on November 19 this year, granted the prosecution’s prayer to do away with Dasuki’s presence since the ex-NSA has elected to stay away from the trial.

    Read Also:Dasuki, Diezani, Shema, Fayose houses top list of seized assets

    Dasuki is standing trial on charges of money laundering and illegal possession of firearms, brought against him by the Federal Government of Nigeria, through the office of the Attorney General of the Federation (AGF).

    The judge’s November 19 ruling was preceded by a letter by Dasuki, in which he requested the court to stop his prosecution on the grounds that the Federal Government has allegedly failed to obey orders made for his release on bail.

    The letter dated November 12, 2018, which he addressed to the Registrar of Court 5, was titled: “Re: Unabated persecution of Col. Mohammed Sambo Dasuki (rtd) by the Federal Government of Nigeria.”

    When the case was called yesterday, prosecuting lawyer, Dipo Okpeseyi (SAN) indicated his readiness to proceed with the case, when defence lawyer, Adeola Adedipe informed the judge about the fresh application filed by his client.

    Adedipe urged the court to set Dasuki’s fresh application down for hearing, in opposition to Okpeseyi’s request that the court should stick to the business of the day, as per the court’s ruling of November 19 in which it elected to proceed with trial, whether or not Dasuki was present.

    Ruling yesterday, Justice Mohammed elected to adjourn further proceedings to allow for the hearing of Dasuki’s fresh application.

    The judge noted that since the fresh application appears to be seeking to stop Okpeseyi from further prosecuting the case, it was incumbent on the court to determine the application before deciding whether or not to proceed with the trial.

    Justice Mohammed adjourned the hearing of the application to January 9 next year.

    In the application filed before the commencement of court’s proceedings on Tuesday, Dasuki is seeking, among others, “an order to adjourn sine die (indefinitely) the trial and/or further trial of the defendant in this case pending compliance by the complainant with this honourable court’s judgment per (delivered by) Hon. Justice Ijeoma L. Ojukwu on July 2, 2018.

    Justice Chukwu had, in the judgment, ordered Dasuki’s release on the grounds that his continued detention amounted to a violation of his fundamental right to liberty.

    Dasuki is contenting that by virtue of section 268(3) of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA), 2015, Okpesyi (SAN), a private legal practitioner, is required to prosecute this charge according to the directions of the Hon. Attorney-General of the Federation, particularly with respect to the aforementioned judgment which is enforceable against him and all authorities.”

    He argued that “further prosecution” of the case by Okpeseyi “without compliance with the judgment by Justice Ojukwu, “will be contrary to the direction of the Hon. Attorney-General of the Federation who is the chief law officer of the federation and a judgment debtor to the said judgment”.

    In the application signed by Ahmed Raji (SAN), Dasuki stated that the “application ought to be granted to preserve the integrity of the Bench and to avoid a constitutional breakdown.”

  • You can stay away, court tells Dasuki

    …To proceed with trial in ex-NSA’s absence

    …Adjourns to Dec 11

     

    A Federal High Court in Abuja on Monday agreed to proceed with the trial of former National Security Adviser (NSA), Sambo Dasuki in his absence.

    Justice Ahmed Mohammed, in a ruling, said Dasuki’s continued absence from court was without any justification.

    Dasuki is standing trial on charges money laundering and illegal possession of firearms, brought against him by the Federal Government of Nigeria.

    Read Also:Dasuki, Diezani, Shema, Fayose houses top list of seized assets

    Justice Mohammed’s decision to do away with Dasuki’s presence was informed by an application by the prosecution, led by Dipo Okpeseyi (SAN).

    At the commencement of proceedings on Monday, Okpeseyi noted that Dasuki, who had written the court on November 12 this year and sought the stoppage of his trial, was absent in court.

    Okpeseyi urged the court to apply the provision of Section 352(4) of Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA), which allows the court to proceed with trial, where the defendant decided to stay away without justifiable reasons.

    Okpeseyi told that court the prosecution has complied with its earlier order, directing the prosecution to file an affidavit, stating that Dasuki has refused to attend court.

    He noted that Dasuki had, since January this years, failed to attend court on four consecutive adjournments.

    The prosecuting lawyer said: “He has been absent for four times. To compound the effrontery, he wrote to this court. That is a direct challenge to the authority of this court. We urge this court not to take the challenge lightly.”

    In a counter-argument, Dasuki’s lawyer, Victor Okwudiri, questioned the competence of the affidavit filed by the prosecution. He noted that the seal of the lawyer, who deposed to the affidavit was not affixed to it as required.

    Okwudiri argued that at the prosecution’s failure to affix the lawyer’s seal to the affidavit amounted to a breach of Rule 10(1), (2), (3) of the Rules of Professional Conduct.

    He further argued that the affidavit failed to comply with the court’s earlier order, which he said, directed the prosecution to state with facts that Dasuki failed to attend court in respect of the day’s proceedings.

    The defence lawyer contended that, by its affidavit, the prosecution merely gave an account of the alleged instances of alleged previous refusal of the defendant to come to court but not in relation to yesterday’s proceedings.

    Ruling, Justice Mohammed brushed aside the objection raised by the defence lawyer and upheld the argument by the prosecution.

    The judge noted that Dasuki wrote a letter dated November 12, 2018 seeking to be excluded from the trial on the grounds that the state had allegedly refused to comply with orders for his release.

    Justice Mohammed said, by his letter and his continued absence from court since he wrote the letter, showed that Dasuki was no longer interested in appearing in court for trial.

    He said: “It is very clear that the defendant is not willing to be attending court for his trial. I hereby invoke the provision of Section 352(4) of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act, by ordering the trial to proceed in his absence.”

    In rejecting the defence’s objection, Justice Mohammed said the affidavit filed by the prosecution, in compliance with the court’s earlier order, was properly filed.

    He said the affidavit did not violate the Rules of Professional Conduct for Legal Practitioners, as alleged by the defence lawyer.

    The judge observed that the lawyer, who deposed to the affidavit, did so in her capacity as a witness and not as a lawyer.

    He adjourned to December 11 for the continuation of trial with or without the defendant’s presence.

    Dasuki had, in the letter, dated November 12, 2018, which he addressed to the Registrar of Court 5, Federal High Court, prayed the court to stop his prosecution on the grounds that the Federal Government has allegedly failed to obey orders made for his release on bail.

    The letter, titled: “Re: Unabated persecution of Col. Mohammed Sambo Dasuki (rtd) by the Federal Government of Nigeria,” was signed by the ex-NSA.

    Dasuki, in the letter gave a brief profile of himself and detailed what he described as constituting his persecution by the Federal Government and its agency, the Department of State Services (DSS).

    He referred to five different orders for his release made, both by Nigerian courts and the Community Court of the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS), which he said the Nigerian government has failed to obey.

    Dasuki said: “The resolve to continue detaining me, against the several orders of court and in brazen violation of the Constitution, is wrongful and arbitrary. It has inflicted physical, emotional and psychological torture on my family and me.

    “The decision of the Federal Government of Nigeria is not only high-handed, it is also arbitrary and in violation of both domestic and international laws on human rights.

    “At this juncture, it will seem that the Nigerian Government is not inclined to yield or obey the orders of any court of law, whether domestic or international.

    “Ironically, the Federal Government still wants to ride on judicial wings to prosecute me. when it does not comply with the orders that proceed from the court, especially in relations to me.

    “At this point, I strongly believe that there must be an end to this hypocrisy and lopsided / partisan rule of law.

    “Since the Federal Government has resolved not to comply with judicial orders directing my release, it is better for the court to also absolve me of the need to submit myself for further prosecution.

    “Justice should be evenly dispensed, as opposed to same, being, in favour of the Federal Government of Nigeria.”

  • Dasuki asks court to excuse him from prosecution

    Former National Security Adviser (NSA), Mohammed Dasuki has asked a Federal High Court to stop his prosecution on the grounds that the Federal Government has allegedly failed to obey orders made for his release on bail.

    Dasuki’s request is contained in his personal letter, dated November 12, 2018 which he addressed to the Registrar of Court 5.

    He is standing trial before the court on charges of money laundering and illegal arms possession. The charges were brought against him by the office of the Attorney General of the Federation (AGF).

    The letter, titled: “Re: Unabated persecution of Col. Mohammed Sambo Dasuki (rtd) by the Federal Government of Nigeria,” was signed by the ex-NSA.

    Dasuki, in the letter gave a brief profile of himself and detailed what he described as constituting his persecution by the Federal Government and its agency, the Department of State Services (DSS).

    He referred to five different orders for his release made, both by Nigerian courts and the Community Court of the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS), which he said the Nigerian government has failed to obey.

    Dasuki said: “The restive to continue detaining me, against the several orders of court and in brazen violation of the Constitution, is wrongful and arbitrary. It has inflicted physical, emotional and psychological torture on my family and me.

    “The decision of the Federal Government of Nigeria is not only high-handed, it is also arbitrary and in violation of both domestic and international laws on human rights.

    “At this juncture, it will seem that the Nigerian Government is not inclined to yield or obey the orders of any court of law, whether domestic or international.

    “Ironically, the Federal Government still wants to ride on judicial wings to prosecute me. when it does not comply with the orders that proceed from the court, especially in relations to me.

    “At this point, I strongly believe that there must be an end to this hypocrisy and lopsided / partisan rule of law.

    “Since the Federal Government has resolved not to comply with judicial orders directing my release, it is better for the court to also absolve me of the need to submit myself for further prosecution.

    “Justice should be evenly dispensed, as opposed to same, being, in favour of the Federal Government of Nigeria.”

    When the case came up on Tuesday before Justice Ahmed Mohammed, Dasuki was absent in court.

    His lawyer, Victor Okwudiri drew the court’s attention to the letter by his client.

    Okwudiri said: “We were not aware of the letter until this morning when we got to court.

    “But what I could get from the letter when I rushed through it this morning, is that he is complaining about his plight in the custody of the DSS,” Okwudiri said.

    Responding, prosecuting lawyer, Dipo Okpeseyi (SAN) said Dasuki informed DSS operatives, who are keeping him that he would not come to court since he had sent a letter to the court.

    Okpeseyi added that although Dasuki could be compelled to attend court, the DSS operatives chose not to take such action to accord him some respect due to his status as a former NSA.

    The prosecuting lawyer argued that Dasuki’s decision not to attend court, but instead, chose to send a letter to the court, amounted to an affront to the court.

    He noted that Dasuki also failed to attend court on January 17 and April 10 this year.

    Relying on the provision of Section 352(4) of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA) 2015, Okpeseyi urged the court to proceed with trial in Dasuki’s absence by directing the prosecution to call its witness, an application, Okwudiri objected to.

    Ruling, Justice Mohammed noted that he had, in a ruling on April 10 this year, directed the prosecution to file an affidavit stating the facts whenever the defendant, on his own decided not to appear in court.

    The judge said the affidavit must be filed convince him that the defendant willfully stayed away from court.

    Justice Mohammed noted that since the prosecution has failed to file an affidavit to also reflect the defendant’s absence on Tuesday, he would adjourn to a later date for the prosecution to comply.

    He adjourned to November 19.

  • Breaking: Court grants ex-NSA Dasuki N200m bail

    A Federal High Court in Abuja has granted bail to former National Security Adviser (NSA), Col. Mohammed Sambo Dasuki (rtd).

    Justice Ijeoma Ojukwu in a judgment on Monday said Dasuki’s continued detention by the state, without sufficient reasons, violated his right to liberty.

    The judgement was on a fundamental rights enforcement application by Dasuki, who has been in the custody of the Department of State Security (DSS) since December 29, 2015.

    Read Also:Dasuki’s ex-aide, eight others re-arraigned for money laundering

    Justice Ojukwu granted Dasuki bail at N200million with two sureties, who must be either a civil servant of Grade Level 16 in the Federal Civil Service or a private citizens, with landed properties in the municipal areas of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT).

    The judge faulted the reasons given by the Federal Government for detaining Dasuki.

    She said the state’s argument that the applicant was being held because of threat to national security and that he was being investigated for money laundering offences do not allow the violation of his right.

    Justice Ojukwu rejected Dasuki’s prayer for N5billion damages, but said should there be need for him to be further interrogated; the DSS should only invite and question him between the hours of 9am and 6pm on work days.

     

    Details later…

     

  • Dasuki loses bid for freedom

    Dasuki loses bid for freedom

    Detained former National Security Adviser (NSA), Sambo Dasuki Friday lost his bid for freedom as the Supreme Court rejected his request to that effect.

    Dasuki had filed two appeals at the apex court, challenging his continued detention by the Department of State Services (DSS) and prayed for the suspension of his trial pending his release by the government,

    In it unanimous judgments Friday, a five-man panel of the Supreme Court, headed by Justice Dattijo Muhammad,  dismissed Dasuki’s appeals for lacking in merit.

    The court described the appeals as an abuse of court process and a ploy by the appellant to delay his trial.

    It noted that the trial initiated in 2015, has been frustrated by various interlocutory applications and appeals.

    Justice Ejembi Eko, who read the lead judgment, said Dasuki’s continued detention was not a violation of any order for bail granted the ex-NSA by both the Federal High Court and High Court of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) before which he is standing trial for separate criminal charges.

    The court said Dasuki’s detention was not at the instance of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) that put him on trial.

    It further said the bails granted Dasuki in respect of criminal charges brought against him by EFCC have been obeyed having been implemented by the Controller of Prison Kuje on December 29, 2015.

    The court affirmed the judgment of the Court of Appeal, which earlier upheld the FCT High Court, where it said the EFCC was not liable for the detention of Dasuki by DSS.

    Justice Eko, who upheld the argument by respondent’s lawyer, Rotimi Jacobs (SAN), noted that Dasuki merely used fair hearing as his “weeping principle to filibuster all the way to this court”.

    The judge said: “I have considered all the issues in the appeal. It is my view that the central issue, both at the trial court and the Court of Appeal, is whether the first respondent (the prosecution) did in fact, disobey, the order made on December 18, 2015, admitting the appellant (Dasuki) to bail pending his trial.

    “That central issue was the substance of the three issues formulated by the appellant and the sole issue formulated by the first respondent at the Court of Appeal.

    “The central or the core issue was not missed by the Court of Appeal. It was, in fact, firmly considered that the appellant in this interlocutory appeal has merely made fair hearing a weeping principle to filibuster all the way to this court.

    “The appellant’s diatribe on the Court of Appeal for expeditious determination of his own appeal is clearly symptomatic of malafide or the type ulterior purpose of this appeal.

    “An appeal brought not bona fide but merely to delay a pending action or to gag other prospective actions is clearly an abuse process. Regarding so, it is clearly an abuse of court process.

    “The appeal lacking in merit, being clearly an abuse of court process is hereby dismissed in its entirety.

    “The case is remitted to the learned trial judge, Honourable Justice H.B Yusuf of the FCT High Court for hearing with further directive that it shall be given accelerated hearing.”

    Justices Dattijo Muhammad (presiding), John Okoro; Centus Nweze and Amina Augie, who were also on the panel, agreed with the lead judgment.

    In one of the charges against Dasuki at the High Court of the FCT, he is being tried with former Governor of Sokoto State, Attahiru Bafarawa, his son, Sagir Bafarawa, a former Director of Finance and Administration in the office of the NSA, Shuaibu Salisu, a former Minister of State for Finance, Bashir Yuguda an Sagir’s firm – Dalhatu Investment.

    They are accused, in the 22-count charge of, among others, diverting about N13bn allegedly meant for the purchase of arms.

    In the second charge of 19 counts, Dasuki, Salisu, Aminu Baba-Kusa and his (Baba-Kusa’s) firms – Acacia Holdings Ltd and Reliance Referral Hospital Limited – are accused of diverting N32bn meant for purchase of arms.

    Dasuki is being tried alone before the Federal High Court, Abuja on charges of money laundering and illegal possession of firearms.

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

  • Supreme Court to rule March 2 on Dasuki’s detention

    Supreme Court to rule March 2 on Dasuki’s detention

    The Supreme Court on Wednesday fixed March 2 next year for judgment on an appeal by former National Security Adviser (NSA), Col. Sambo Dasuki, challenging his alleged indefinite detention.

    The panel of five Justices, led by Dattijo Mohammed, gave the date after counsels to the parties in the case adopted their addresses.

    The ex-NSA had on June 15, 2016 at the Court of Appeal in Abuja, lost his bid to enforce his freedom after securing bails on all the charges against him.

    The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) recalls that Dasuki is standing trial for allegedly mismanaging 2.1 billion dollars meant for purchase of arms to fight the Boko Haram insurgents.
    Dasuki’s counsel, Mr Joe Daudu, argued that the decision of the Court of Appeal was erroneous, adding that it was incumbent on the Supreme Court to restore the integrity of all courts.

    Daudu submitted that it was out of place for the court of appeal to scuttle the fundamental rights of a citizen after well-considered decisions of four courts that admitted the applicant to bail.
    He said that his client needed the bail to prepare his defence, adding that he could not have access to security documents while in detention.

    “My Lords, Dasuki is already being treated as a convict, even when none of the charges brought against him has been concluded.

    “We sincerely pray this esteemed court to do the needful by setting aside the decision of the lower court.

    “We also pray the court to momentarily halt the applicant’s trial until the Federal Government obeys the bail order of court,’’ Daudu said.

    Mr Rotimi Jacobs, counsel to EFCC, opposed the appeal, saying that it lacked merit and should be dismissed.

    He said the bail condition granted Dasuki was perfected on Dec. 29, 2015, adding that a warrant of release to that effect was served on the Comptroller of Prisons in Kuje, upon which he was released.

    Jacobs said the Federal Government had not violated his rights, adding that the applicant was only re-arrested by the operatives of the DSS over other fraud allegations.

    He said that it was unfair for the applicant to consider his re-arrest as a disobedience to court’s order on his bail.

    He said that no court bail was targeted at the DSS when granted.

    “The EFCC which put Dasuki on trial on criminal charges at the FCT High Court cannot be held responsible for the action of the DSS on the ground that the two agencies are different entities.

    “Besides, My Lords, the appeal court has said there was no existing order against the re-arrest of Dasuki.

    “Suffice to say that there cannot be a disobedience to a non-existing court order.

    “We pray the apex court to affirm the decision of the lower court which ordered the continuation of the applicant’s trial even while he remains in detention,’’ he said.

    Dasuki had approached Supreme Court praying it to set aside the decision of the Court of Appeal which exonerated EFCC from his re-arrest shortly after he perfected his bail conditions.

    He further asked the court to void the ruling of the Federal High Court.

    The trial court had held that DSS and EFCC were distinct agents of the Federal Government, which is the complainant in the charges against the applicant.

    Dasuki had alleged that such pronouncement had given the two agents of government handling the trial to act at variance and against justice.

     

  • Court refuses to stop Dasuki’s trial 

    Court refuses to stop Dasuki’s trial 

    A Federal High Court in Abuja Wednesday rejected the request by former National Security Adviser (NSA), Mohammed Dasuki for an indefinite adjournment in his trial for alleged illegal possession of firearms and money laundering.

    Dasuki had filed a motion, seeking an indefinite adjournment in his trial pending the determination of an appeal he filed before the Court of Appeal in Abuja, which he said was a referral of a question of law to the appellate for determination.

    Justice Ahmed Mohammed, in a ruling yesterday, said Dasuki’s motion was misconceived and lacked merit because it was hinged on a non-existing question of law purportedly referred to the appellate court.

    Justice Mohammed said the procedure for referring a constitutional question to the Court of Appeal, under section 295(2) of the Constitution, required that such referral should be made by the trial court, but not by a party in the trial filing an appeal.

    The judge said: “In the procedure stated in section 295(2) of the Constitution, it is the trial court, and in this case, this court that will form the opinion that a question as to the interpretation or the application of the Constitution has arisen in the proceedings before it.

    “After forming such opinion it is the court that will also refer the question that has arisen to the Court of Appeal. There is nothing in section 295(2) of the Constitution conferring those functions on any of the parties in the proceedings.

    “The only role a party can play is to make a request to the trial court for the reference of any such questions, on the interpretation or application of the Constitution, to the Court of Appeal

    “In this case, I cannot remember when the court had come to the conclusion or formed any opinion that a question as to the interpretation or application of the Constitution had arisen in these proceedings let alone making any reference of such questions to the Court of Appeal for consideration.

    “I can also not remember when any of the parties in this case had made a request for the reference of any question as to the interpretation of the Constitution to the Court of Appeal to warrant any such reference in accordance with the provisions of section 295(2) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended).

    “In all sincerity, the procedure adopted by the defendant to challenge the ruling of the court delivered on June 15, 2017 cannot be described as reference of a question as to the interpretation of the Constitution contemplated in section 305(1)(a) of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act 2015.”

    “What the defendant has done, as stated earlier, is a challenge of the ruling delivered on June 15, 2017, by way of an appeal.

    “It is therefore my humble view that it is only after the provision of section 305(1)(a) of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act  has been strictly adhered to regarding reference to the Court of Appeal of any question as to the interpretation of the Constitution that the defendant can avail himself of the right to bring an application for adjournment as provided in the section.

    “By the wording of Section 306 of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA), the Act has taken away the power of the court to even entertain an application to stay proceedings in a criminal matter before it

    “This, therefore means that any relief, however couched in an application that has the effect of staying proceedings in a criminal matter before a court will not be entertained,” Justice Mohammed said.

    He adjourned further proceedings in the case to January 17 next year.

    Dasuki’s lawyer, Ahmed Raji (SAN) had, while arguing the motion on October 17 this year, urged the court to adjourn the trial indefinitely pending the determination of his client’s motion for stay of proceedings filed before the Court of Appeal along with an appeal against the June 15 ruling of the court.

    Raji drew a distinction between his client’s motion filed under Section 305 of ACJA and the one prohibited under Section 306 of the Act.

    He said his client’s motion did not seek stay of proceedings prohibited under Section 306 of ACJA, but was brought under Section 305 of ACJA, which allows the court to adjourn a trial after a constitutional question, arising from the trial, has been referred to a higher court for determination.

    Raji argued that his client’s appeal filed against the ruling delivered by Justice Mohammed on June 15, 2017, permitting prosecution’s witnesses to testify behind screen, was a form of reference of a constitutional question to the Court of Appeal.

    He said since Dasuki has filed a motion before the appellate court for the stay of proceedings in the trial, and the appeal entered, it was the tradition that the lower court awaits the decision of the higher court.

    Lawyer to the prosecution, Dipo Okpeseyi (SAN) said the motion amounted to an abuse of court process

    Okpeseyi argued that the motion was founded on a non-existing premise because no constitutional question had been referred by the court to the Court of Appeal, adding that what Dasuki merely filed was a notice of appeal against the ruling of the court.

    He said the appeal filed by Dasuki did not qualify as a referral which was the basis for the application.

    Okpeseyi contended that the motion was seeking an order of stay of proceedings, although Raji attempted to cover it up by using flowery words.

    He noted that the Supreme Court had ruled that an order of stay of proceedings in a criminal matter was ungrantable.

    Justice Mohammed’s ruling yesterday upheld Okpeseyi’s argument.

     

  • I need to consult records over Metuh’s case – Dasuki

    I need to consult records over Metuh’s case – Dasuki

    Retired Col. Mohammed Sambo Dasuki, former National Security Adviser (NSA), said on Wednesday he needed to consult relevant documents to enable him to recall any transaction with former People Democratic Party, (PDP) spokesman, Olisah Metuh, being tried over alleged N400 million case.

    Dasuki made the statement at the Federal High Court, Abuja, when he appeared as a subpoenaed witness in the ongoing trial of Metuh.

    The former NSA, who was led in evidence by Mr Emeka Etiaba (SAN), counsel to Metuh, told the court that he had been in the Department of State Security Services custody since December 2015.

    He added that he could not remember if he had any dealings with Metuh in 2014 in respect to the amount for which the Federal Government was currently prosecuting him.

    “It will be difficult for me to remember without reference to my records, details of any monies paid to Metuh or Destra Nig. Ltd. (the second defendant in the matter) in 2014 as three years is a long time.”

    When Etiaba sought to know when he thought he would have access to his records, Dasuki said that would be possible as soon as the authorities holding him released him on bail.

    “I am unable to answer any questions in regards to his charge without consulting my records.

    “I stated earlier that I have been in custody so it is only when the authorities holding me decide to obey the three bail orders granted by three different courts and one ECOWAS court judgement asking that I be released and release me, I do not know,” Dasuki said.

    He, however, told the court that he was awaiting a Supreme Court ruling concerning his release on bail.

    At this point, Etiaba told the court that the witness was willing to testify but needed time to access his records in order to help the court in the matter.

    He prayed the court to grant an adjournment and direct those holding the witness to allow him to have access to his records.

    According to him, the directive that Dasuki should be produced in court has been honoured and so this new directive should also be honoured.

    Mr Tochukwu Onwubufor (SAN), counsel to the second defendant, aligned himself with the submissions of Etiaba, noting that an adjournment was necessary to allow the witness consult his records.

    The prosecuting counsel, Mr Sylvanus Tahir, however, opposed the application for an adjournment.

    He based his argument on the grounds that some of the documents needed to be used to cross examine the witness such as the e-payment mandate were in the court’s records.

    Tahir asked the court to discountenance the arguments canvassed by Dasuki’s counsel, Mr Ahmed Raji (SAN) that his client was not in the right frame of mind to give evidence, having been incarcerated in the last two years.

    He said that this was because there was no medical report before the court to prove it.

    The prosecutor urged the court to compel the two defendants to make use of documents already tendered as exhibits in court and not entertain the application for adjournment.

    The judge, Justice Okon Abang adjourned the matter until Friday to rule on the application for adjournment.

    The judge had earlier struck out a motion argued by Mr Mike Ozekhome (SAN) on behalf of former President Goodluck Jonathan in which he prayed the court to set aside the subpoena issued on him.

    Abang struck out the motion on the ground that he had no jurisdiction to entertain the motion because Jonathan had not been formally served with the subpoena as required by law.

    He said that the former president could only raise issues against the subpoena after he was duly served.

    The judge had also dismissed an application by Dasuki asking the court for an adjournment in respect of the subpoena on him and pending the determination of his appeal in the Court of Appeal.

    He said that since Dasuki was not a defendant but a witness in the matter, he had no “locus standi” to seek for an adjournment.(NAN)

  • A’Court reserves ruling on Metuh’s request for Dasuki as witness

    A’Court reserves ruling on Metuh’s request for Dasuki as witness

    The Court of Appeal in Abuja has reserved ruling in an interlocutory appeal filed by the former National Publicity Secretary of the People’s Democratic Party (PDP), Chief Olisa Metuh.

    Metuh is by the appeal, challenging the refusal of the Federal High Court, Abuja to issue a subpoena on a former National Security Adviser (NSA), Sambo Dasuki to appear in court to testify as defence witness in his (Metuh’s) trial.

    The ex-PDP spokesman is being tried before the Federal High Court in Abuja on allegation of unlawfully receiving N400m form Dasuki and allegedly engaging in money laundering.

    Metuh, who is currently conducting his defence in the case, had applied to the court for a subpoena on Dasuki to testify for him (Metuh), a request the trial judge, Justice Okon Abang rejected.

    Justice Abang, in a ruling, said Dasuki was not a compellable witness and asked Metuh to seeks other ways of getting the DSS to produce Dasuki to testify for him.

    In his appeal, Metuh wants among others, that Justice Abang be set aside.

    Metuh said he approached the trial court to issue the subpoena on Dasuki because of his inability to get the Department of State Services (DSS) to produce Dasuki to no avail, after several efforts.

    He said the appearance and testimony of Dasuki were crucial for the establishment of the justice of the case.

    Wednesday, a three-man panel of the Court of Appeal, Abuja entertained arguments from Onyechi Ikpeazu (SAN) for Metuh and Sylvanus Tahir (for the state) in relation to the appeal, following which the court reserved ruling and promised to informed parties when the ruling was ready.

  • Nigeria now a gestapo state under APC – Makarfi

    Nigeria now a gestapo state under APC – Makarfi

    The Ahmed Makarfi led Caretaker Committee of the People’s Democratic Party (PDP) has accused the All Progressives Congress (APC) led Federal Government of running a Gestapo state.

    According to the faction, the country is fast drifting into a dictatorship and possible anarchy under the present administration.

    A statement on Thursday by the spokesman of the Makarfi camp, Prince Dayo Adyeye complained that prominent individuals that held public office in the last administration are being arrested and detained indefinitely without trial.

    “For instance, the former Governor of Benue State, Mr. Gabriel Suswam was arrested by men of the Directorate of State Services (DSS) and has been in detention for over two months now without trial.

    “Also, the former Governor of Niger State, Dr. Babangida Aliyu was arrested on April 5, 2017 by officers of the Economic and Financial Crime Commission (EFCC) and like the others, he has been in detention and yet no case has been filed against him in any court by the anti-graft agency.

    “Former National Security Adviser (NSA), Col. Sambo Dasuki has been in custody for about two years now without trial. Similar brutality, arrest and mindless detention went on with other PDP leaders and members that were arrested by either the DSS or the EFCC”, the statement said.

    The opposition further lamented what it described as media trial and conviction of opposition elements before they are proven innocent or otherwise by the courts.

    The statement continued, “It is also very clear in the Constitution of Nigeria that no security agency has the right or power to detain suspects more than 48 hours without trial.

    “Ironically, while former leaders and members of the PDP are being arrested indiscriminately and detained without trial, other former office holders of the ruling APC who have been accused of various corrupt practices are yet to be arrested. Instead, they are compensated with juicy ministerial appointments -double standards.

    “We are in a constitutional democracy and as such, the present APC administration must lead by example and obey court orders. It is on record that most of these suspects have been granted bail by the courts of the land and the ECOWAS Court in the case of Col. Sambo Dasuki .This is sheer lawlessness!

    “We wish to further assure the public that the PDP is not against the anti-corruption fight. Our stand is that the present APC government must follow due process in dealing with issues of corruption as the PDP did during its governments without violating human rights of citizens, especially those suspects that may later be found innocent by the law court”.

    Accusing the administration of injustice and vendetta, Makarfi called on the government to charge all those in detention to court and those granted bail by the courts must be freed immediately.

    The party vowed to deploy all constitutional means both domestic and international to seek redress against what it described as Gestapo rule.

    The party reminded the administration that the country is under a democracy and that Nigerians are fed up with undemocratic rule.

    “We advise this government to stop forthwith; all actions that tend to heat up the system and push citizens into taking extreme measures in self defence.

    “The economic hardship brought upon Nigerians by APC misrule is bad enough, abridging the people’s rights on top of that is like adding salt to injury”, the statement added