The Nation Newspaper

Tag: former spokesman of the People’s Democratic Party (PDP)

  • Breaking: Metuh collapses in court

    Former spokesman of the People’s Democratic Party (PDP), Olisa Metuh collapsed Monday morning at the resumed hearing in his trial before the Federal High Court, Abuja.

    Metuh, who is being tried for alleged money laundering offences, with his company, Destra Investment Limited, collapsed when he attempted to enter the dock when the case was called.

    Read Also: I can’t be convicted, says Metuh

    Metuh had consistently complained of ill-health for some time now. He had on two occasions applied to the court to be allowed to travel abroad for medical attention, whcih the court rejected.

    Metuh was still lying in the dock and being attended to by medical officials of the court.

    Metuh’s lawyer, Emeka Eitaba (SAN) has applied to withdraw from the case following the directive by the trial judge, Justice Okon Abang that proceedings must continue.

     

    Details later…

     

  • Money laundering: I can’t be convicted – Metuh

    ….As court refuses request for foreign treatment

     

    Former spokesman of the People’s Democratic Party (PDP), Olisa Metuh said Thursday that his trial will not lead to conviction.

    Metuh said: “I will go to the witness box. There is nothing in my case that will ever lead to conviction.”

    He spoke in Abuja Thursday while reacting to a ruling by Justice Okon Abang of the Federal High Court on his (Metuh’s) motion for leave to travel abroad for medical treatment.

    Metuh and his company, Destra Investment Limited are being tried before the court on charges of money laundering.

    They are said to have unlawfully received N400m from the Office of the National Security Adviser (ONSA) in November 2014 to fund the party’s presidential campaign ahead of the 2015 poll.

    Metuh and Destra are also said to have engaged in cash transaction of $2m without going through a financial institution.

    Ruling yesterday, Justice Abang said his court lacked jurisdiction to entertain Metuh’s motion, since he failed to appeal the court’s decision in May 2016, rejecting similar a application by the defendant.

    The judge also said the motion, argued by parties last month, was without merit because it was not supported by a medical report.

    Metuh, who had on two occasions attended court on a stretcher and later on wheel chair, came to court yesterday with the aid of a walking frame.

    Justice Abang had, on May 25, 2016 dismissed a similar motion for the release of his passport to enable him seek medical attention in the United Kingdom.

    While dismissing the latest one yesterday, the judge upheld the argument by Sylvanus Tahir (for the prosecution) that Exhibit 3, relied upon by the applicant amounted to “a documentary hearsay” in as much as the doctor who issued it did not personally examine Metuh.

    Justice Abang noted that, besides failing to personally examine Metuh, the doctor who authored the document merely relied on other medical reports which were never produced before the court for scrutiny.

    Justice Abang said: “To the extent that the author of Exhibit 3 relied  on the content of two other letters or two other medical reports dated January 20, 2017 and January 30, 2018 to come to the conclusion that the defendant needed to be referred to the United Kingdom, the Exhibit 3 is a documentary hearsay which is not tenable. I so hold.

    “In the same vein, the applicant cannot rely on the document not brought before the court without producing the document before the court.

    “He (Metuh) ought to have known that it is no longer fashionable to use ill health to delay trial,” the judge said.

    Justice Abang noted that had the court not prevented Metuh from hijacking the proceedings, he would not have called the 10 witnesses that had appeared in court to defend him.

    He added: “On the account of the conduct of the 1st defendant (Metuh) since February 9, 2016 when the prosecution closed its case whereby the defendant has employed all manners of tactics to delay the case, I cannot exercise my discretion in his favour.

    “On whether the court has jurisdiction to entertain the application, in the final analysis, I have no jurisdiction to entertain the matter on merit.

    “On whether the application has merit, the application lacks merit and accordingly dismissed.”

    The judge further noted that there was no medical report filed in support of the application even when the Supreme Court had ruled that for such application to be granted it must be backed by a convincing medical report to the satisfaction of the court.

    He said Metuh could not have filed a medical report since the court had, on January 25, 2016 prohibited him from filing such report since he had resorted to using his ill health to frustrate the trial.

    The judge was of the view that instead of filing a fresh motion for permission to travel abroad, Metuh ought to have appealed the 2016 ruling of the court.

    Justice Abang adjourned to today for further proceedings in the case.

    Reacting to the judge’s ruling after the court’s proceedings, Metuh described court’s decision as “frustrating” and “shocking”.

    He noted: “This is because, in the course of our filing the application we had contended with the fact that the judge said we should not bring medical report again.

    Metuh, who is currently conducting his defence, has called 10 witnesses.

    He noted that “in the course of defending this matter, there is nothing unlawful or illegal that we have done”.

    Metuh insisted that he was innocent. He said he was eager to defend himself and might have have to stop calling from his fresh list of 10 witnesses to enable him personally take the witness stand.

    He said: “I will go to the witness box. There is nothing in my case that will ever lead to conviction.”

    Read Also: Money Laundering: Court dismisses SAN’s, ex-minister’s no-case submissions

  • Metuh attends court on stretcher

    Metuh attends court on stretcher

    Former spokesman of the People’s Democratic Party (PDP), Olisa Metuh was brought to court Monday on a stretcher in compliance with an order of a Federal High Court, Abuja that he must attend court or have his bail revoked.

    Justice Okon Abang in a ruling on January 25, rejected a medical report tendered by Metuh’s lawyers, claiming he was on admission in an hospital. The judge noted that report was not properly before the court and did not meet the necessary requirement.

    Instead, Justice Abang agreed to an adjournment, but ordered Metuh to attend court on February 5, 2018 or have the bail earlier granted him revoked.

    In compliance with that order, his lawyer ensured he was brought to court early Monday in a white ambulance, bearing the name and logo of the National Hospital, Abuja.

    Metuh was later taken into the courtroom on a stretcher, with the assistance of some relations, friends and associates.

    He was covered with a white cloth, with an opening only in his head area, possibly to allow him breathe. He had bandage on his legs and a neck brace on.

    Metuh and his company, Destra Investment Limited are being tried on allegations of corruption and money laundering.

    When proceedings opened, Metuh’s lawyer, Onyechi Ikpeazu (SAN) told the court that his client was in court in obedience to the court’s order, but was not in a good state to stand trial.

    He sought a month’s adjournment to allow his client receive medical attention and within which he (Metuh) would have been fit enough to stand trial.

    Lawyer to Destra, Tochukwu Onwugbufor (SAN) associated himself with Ikpeazu’s position.

    Responding, lead prosecution lawyer, Sylvanus Tahir said he appreciated the 1st defendant’s (Metuh’s) health condition, having seen the manner he was brought to court.

    Tahir said he was not opposed to the defence’s request for adjournment for a month.

    He noted that none of the papers tendered by the defence suggested the length of time that the 1st defendant will be hospitalised, but added: “We leave the decision about the time to the discretion of the court.

    “May I disabuse the mind of everybody (the court, the gallery and the defence team) that we are prosecutors, not persecutors. And in doing that, we have no ill-will or ill-feeling against anybody,” Tahir said.

    In his reply, Ikpeazu appreciated Tahir for his understanding. And, as regard when his client will be fit for trial, Ikpeazu said the doctors were not categorical.

    He said: “We believe that within the one month that we have asked, and we pray extensively to that effect, that the 1st defendant should be fit to continue with his trial

    “That period is a reasonable period for the medial doctors to enter a proper evaluation and assessment of the state of health of the 1st defendant. We fervently hope and pray that he will be fit to continue with this trial,” Ikpeazu said.

    Ruling, Justice Abang said he was mindful of granting the adjournment sought by Metuh’s lawyer in view of his state of health and since the prosecution did not oppose the request for adjournment.

    The judge added: “A court of law must be firm in its decision. A court of law must be fair to parties in a matter placed before it. And, when occasion demands, a court of law must also be humane.

    “I have seen the condition that the 1st defendant is in the courtroom. On the account of the condition in which I have seen the 1st defendant in the courtroom, I am inclined to exercise my discretion in his favour in adjourning this matter, at his instance, to enable him receive medical treatment.”

    Justice Abang adjourned to March 14 for possible continuation of trial in the case.

  • My request for Jonathan as witness not to humiliate him – Metuh

    My request for Jonathan as witness not to humiliate him – Metuh

    Former spokesman of the People’s Democratic Party (PDP) has said his request that ex-President Goodluck Jonathan be compelled to testify as defence witness in his trial was not intended to humiliate Jonathan.

    Metuh said his choice of Jonathan as a witness, was for the ex-President to corroborate his argument that he was innocent of all allegations against him in the charges on which he was being tried.

    He denied allegation by a group – Save Ijaw Nation Group – that the subpoena issued on Jonathan was part of a plot to let him (Metuh) off the hook.

    Metuh, in a statement issued Thursday, said he has no reason to connive with anyone to embarrass Jonathan or seek to be let of the hook, because he was not in any hook, and was innocent of all allegations against him.

    The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) is prosecuting Metuh and his company, Destra Investments Limited, before the Federal High Court, Abuja, 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 that Metuh and his firm used the N400m for PDP’s campaign activities during the 2015 presidential election.

    N400m was alleged to be “part of the proceeds of an unlawful activities” of former National Security Adviser (NSA), Mohammed Dasuki.

    But, Metuh has consistently denied knowing that the N400m was paid into his account from the office of the NSA. He has insisted that the N400m‎ was paid to his company’s account by Jonathan for a public relations campaign for his (Jonathan’s) government.

    Metuh, who is currently conducting his defence in the case, applied to the court to issue supoena on Jonathan and Dasuki to compel them to testify as his witnesses in the trial.

    The ex-PDP spokesman said his lawyer had written the duo, who allegedly failed to respond to their letters, a development that informed his decision to apply for the issuance of subpoena on the two.

    Based on Metuh’s request, the trial judge, Justice Okon Abang signed the witness summons issued on Jonathan and Dasuki.

    Both men were absent in court on Wednesday. The court found out that Jonathan has not been served with the subpoena and that although, Dasuki was served, the Department of State Services (DSS) failed to produce him in court.

    While adjourning the case on October 25, Justice Abang gave the court’s bailiff five days to efffect personal service on Jonathan, failing which he should be served through substituted means.

    On Dasuki, the judge ordered the EFCC to explore administrative means, to ensure that DSS produce Dasuki on the next date of October 31.

    In his statement issued yesterday, Metuh said: “My attention has been drawn to a release by the Save Ijaw Nation Group wherein they alleged that the order given by the court in my trial was negotiated by me as a means of letting me ‘off the hook.’

    “They also stated that I surrendered myself to be used to drag down former President Goodluck Jonathan and impugn on his character and person.

    “In the light of this and in deference to the former President, I have elected to make these clarifications personally.

    “First of all, I state unequivocally that I am completely innocent of the charge against me and therefore have no reason to negotiate with anybody to let me off a non-existent hook.

    “It is therefore inconceivable and completely ridiculous for anybody to think that I would for any reason betray or surrender myself to be used against President Goodluck Jonathan, for whom I have immense respect and served diligently, without any apologies, in and out of office.

    “To what end will I conspire with the same set of people, who singled me out to be humiliated and openly handcuffed, while spreading all manner of malicious stories against me, most of which they even denied outright in court while others remain completely unsubstantiated?

    “Ordinarily, the content of the charge against me in the Federal High Court should not breed any worries but for the fact that it now appears that the anti-corruption fight has shifted the burden of proof to a defendant once an allegation is made.

    “On the issue of conniving with the government against former President Goodluck Jonathan, the Save Ijaw Nation Group may be alarmed by successive media reports that he was ordered to be served on Tuesday with an instruction to appear the following day and subsequently given a five-day time limit; setting off a media frenzy as if the former president is needed for reasons more than a mere request by my lawyers for a corroborative evidence in my case.

    “I totally concede that this is not deserving of the status, person and image of the former President especially with his contribution and sacrifices to national development and sustenance of democracy in our dear country.

    “Without prejudice to all the foregoing, I accept that it was the need for corroboration of lack of mens rea on my part that led my lawyers to request for the evidence of the respected former President to assist them in proving my innocence.

    “However, with all the controversies arising from the reports of the said pronouncements and the attendant concerns thereof, I have instructed my legal team to revisit and review the entire issue of the subpoena.

    “In the past 20 months I have shouldered my travails personally and without seeking to involve any other individual and/or groups in this unfortunate saga.

    “I habour no ill feeling or malice towards none as I believe that with time, justice will surely be done in my matter,” Metuh said.

  • Destruction of evidence: Judge’s absence stalls Metuh’s trial

    Destruction of evidence: Judge’s absence stalls Metuh’s trial

    The absence from court Thursday, of the Chief Judge of the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), Justice Ishaq Bello stalled proceedings in the trial of former spokesman of the People’s Democratic Party (PDP), Olisa Metuh for allegedly destroying evidence earlier submitted to the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC).

    The judge’s absence served Metuh’s interest as he had been reluctant in opening his defence about eight months after the prosecution, led by Sylvanus Tahir, closed its case on October 10, 2016 having called three witnesses.

    Justice Bello was said to have attended a valedictory court session in honour of the pioneer judge of the High Court of the FCT, Justice Victoria Onejeme, who died on April 27 this year at 87 years.

    The EFCC alleged, in a three-count charge it brought against Metuh, that he destroyed the statement he made under caution to the agency’s operatives and investigators on January 5, 2016 while in custody.

    The prosecution alleged that the ex-spokesperson for the PDP “destroyed document to prevent its production as evidence”, thereby committing an offence which is said to be punishable under Section 166 of the Penal Code CAP 532 LFN, Abuja (2004).

    It also alleged that the destruction of evidence amounted to “mischief”, an offence said to be contrary to Section 326 and punishable under Section 327 of the Penal Code.

    Metuh pleaded not guilty to the two counts when he was arraigned about a year ago on January 21, 2016.

    The case has been further adjourned to July 4

    The prosecution had on February 26, 2016, through its first witness, Junaid Said, gave details of how Metuh tore a sheet of the four-sheet statement he made to interrogators at the EFCC.

    Said said; “My Lord, when he concluded writing his statement which was on four sheets of the EFCC statement form, I collected the statement and read over it, I then handed the statement over to my superiors Musa and Wetkas. When I was handing over the statement, the defendant said he was surprised that he had written that much and that he felt he had given too much information.

    “Because of the comment, I was worried I gave him the statement sheets one after the other for endorsement. He endorsed the first and second sheet, but tore the third sheet. The third sheet was where the defendant (Metuh) disclosed that he received the money for PDP political activities, settle his personal needs and made reference to former President Goodluck Jonathan.

    “My lord, he suddenly tore the statement sheet into pieces, in great shock and surprise I stood up I asked him why he did what he did? He said he did that because he was no longer willing to give the information on that statement sheet.

    “I then requested the pieces of the statement, he declined and attempted to put them in his pocket, I then cautioned him and told him to respect himself he insisted that he was going to dispose the tore sheet.

    “I persuaded him to handover the tore sheet and brought one plain paper before him, he poured the pieces on the plain sheet, my other colleagues were there looking at us in surprise as well. He furthered tore them into pieces, saying only in the movies would this be recovered.

    “I poured the pieces in the commission’s transparent polythene bag for exhibit and made entry of the incident into the EFCC’s incident duty station diary as well as EFCC’s pocket notebook. Later, in the day he requested to make additional statement, which he made, wrote his name and signed but declined to make any other statement on the torn paper.’’

    The EFCC’s incident duty station diary, EFCC’s pocket notebook and pieces of the torn statement were tendered and admitted as exhibits.