The Nation Newspaper

Tag: Onyechi Ikpeazu (SAN)

  • 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.

  • 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

  • ‘What we recovered from Justice Ademola’s home’

    ‘What we recovered from Justice Ademola’s home’

    The Department of State Services (DSS) gave details on Tuesday of what its operatives recovered from the Abuja home of Justice Adeniyi Ademola and how the search on the judge’s house was conducted.
    Operatives of the DSS had on December 7, 2016, invaded the judge’s house at night, searched it, following which Justice Ademola was arrested and released later.
    A DSS operative, Ike Onuoha, who said he led a team of eight men to the judge’s house at No 30B, S.O Ogbemudia Crescent, Apo Legislative Quarters, Abuja, said the invasion of the Judge’s house was upon instruction from his superior.
    Onuoha spoke while testifying as the second prosecution witness in the trial of Justice Ademola, his wife, Olabowale and a lawyer, Joe Agi (SAN) on Tuesday.
    Led in evidence by lead prosecution lawyer, Segun Jegede, Onuoha said his team was briefed based on a petition and information relating to incriminating items in the house of the judge.
    He said the search was conducted in the presence of the judge’s lawyer, Agi and his (judge’s) cook, Ken, and that they recovered N54m, $121,279, €4,400, £80  and 1,010 rupees.
    Onuoha said his team also recovered two pump action rifles and 35 life cartridges.
    Justifying why the team forced it’s way into the house, the witness said: “When we entered the premises, we called on Ken to call the Judge with his mobile phone. Ken called the judge severally but he refused to pick.
    “Much later, the Judge sent a text message that he was not in town. After repeated calls, he switched off his phone. At that point, we had no option than to force open the main door.
    “When we entered, we saw Justice Ademola in the master-bedroom upstairs in his night wears. That was few minutes after 12 midnight.”
    Onuoha added that the judge later asked them to await his lawyer, Agi, who after discussing with the judge gave the team the nod to search the house.
    “As we continued our search on the ground floor, we encountered a locked bedroom.
    “We requested for the keys, but we were not given. We then had no option than to force open the door. Inside the bedroom, we saw a locked wardrobe which we also had to force open when the keys were not made available to us.
    “Inside the wardrobe, we found a Ghana-must-go bag, containing various N1,000 denomination notes to the tune of N39.5 million after counting it on the spot.
    “We also found two black pump action rifles and 35 life cartridges of ammunition. We also found a silver-coloured flash drive”, Onuoha said.
    The witness said his team also found another locked room where they recovered the sum of N8.5 million in N1,000 denomination inside a black and white medium sized bags locked up in a wardrobe.
    He said they also found, in the master-bedroom, in an open wardrobe, a black bag “where we found the sum of N6m, $121,179,  €4,400, £80, 1,010 Indian Rupees.
    “We also recovered six ATM cards, eight cheque books, eight deposit slips for various banks, two firearm licence – one for Honourable Justice A.R. Muhammed, the other for Honourable Justice Adeniyi Ademola. We also recovered two Apple iPads.”
    Under cross-examination by a defence lawyer, Onyechi Ikpeazu (SAN), Onuohasaid his team forced the main door of the judge’s house opened, “using screw bar because the cook and the private security guard refused to open the door even after we  introduced ourselves and  told them our mission.”
    He denied the claim by Ikpeazu that there were bullet holes on the security door to the judge’s house.
    On whether the judge searched members of his team before they searched his house, Onuoha said the judge’s cook did the searching.
    Onuoha said his team did not see the judge’s wife when they visited. He added her property were not part of the items recovered from the house.
    The witness said he did not see the petition on which his team acted and that he did not know whether there was a petition or not against the judge.
    He said he was not aware that ordering the release of Nnamdi Kanu from DSS’ custody by Justice Ademola was the judge’s offence against the DSS that prompted the search.
    Onuoha said  he could not provide the sources of the information, because “Sources of information are classified.”
    Justice Okeke adjourned further proceedings to Wednesday.
    Before the adjournment, Jegede told the court that his witnesses were being threatened.
  • Metuh ‘supports’ anti-graft war

    Metuh ‘supports’ anti-graft war

    The former spokesperson of Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), Chief Olisa Metuh, has expressed his support for the present administration anti-corruption campaign.

    Metuh’s counsel, Onyechi Ikpeazu (SAN), said in a statement on Thursday that the ex-PDP spokesman has agreed to return the N400 million he allegedly received from the former National Security Adviser, Sambo Dasuki, to the Federal Government.

    Ikpeazu said his client’s legal team and officials of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) have begun talks to facilitate the return of the funds to federal government.

    The statement reads: “We want to explain the reasons for our client’s proposal to refund the N400 million released to him by former President Goodluck Jonathan, and which was expended on a project approved by the ex-President on national issues relating to his Presidency and the federal government at that time.

    “We want to restate that at the time the money was released to him after his presentation to the ex-President, our client had no knowledge of the source, a fact that is now obvious from the evidence of the prosecution and defence witnesses. Our client had every cause to believe that the money was from the ex-President to whom he made a presentation, received directives and rendered report and accounts accordingly.

    “When the matter first came up, and Chief Metuh was invited to the Office of the National Security Adviser (ONSA) in December 2015, he requested to know the source of the money and expressed his readiness to make refunds if it was from government coffers, not minding that the money had been expended as directed by the former President. Officials at ONSA never got back to him as they promised, until his arrest by the EFCC in January 2016.

    “It was, however while in court that a document was brought regarding the source of the money and since then, our client has made manifest his willingness to refund the money and has indeed approached his family, friends and associates to mobilise funds to refund the entire N400 million to the government regardless of the fact that the money had been expended based on the directives of the former President and that part of the money had been recovered from one of the prosecution witnesses.

    “We want to confirm that since then, we have been in talks with the Ministry of Justice, the EFCC and other necessary bodies on how to refund the money and resolve the issue.

    “Our client occupied no government office. His commitment and dedication to his official duties have been confirmed by even prosecution witnesses. In this whole saga, he has been an unfortunate victim of circumstances. His refunding the money, therefore, goes to show his support for the anti-corruption war as well as serve as a testament to his sincerity, integrity and honesty in this matter.

    “There is no doubt that the prosecution has considerably embarked on some expenses in the course of this case. It is hoped that by not discounting the sum already recovered, whatever cost so far incurred would have been defrayed. By this, a critical objective of recovery of funds would no doubt be achieved.

    “It is pertinent to restate our client’s continued support for the anti-corruption campaign, which is necessary to ensure probity in the affairs of Nigeria to the extent that it is conducted within the rule of law.

    “Finally, it is our client’s prayer that this nation shall come through this difficult time by the grace of the Almighty God.”