N400m: Will Metuh remove Jonathan, Dasuki from witness’ list?

With the unfavourable reactions that have greeted the summons by former spokesman of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), Olisa Metuh, on both former president Goodluck Jonathan and the former National Security Adviser (NSA), retired Col. Sambo Dasuki, observers are contemplating the possibility of the two witnesses being removed from the trial.  Metuh is facing trial […]

With the unfavourable reactions that have greeted the summons by former spokesman of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), Olisa Metuh, on both former president Goodluck Jonathan and the former National Security Adviser (NSA), retired Col. Sambo Dasuki, observers are contemplating the possibility of the two witnesses being removed from the trial. 

Metuh is facing trial since January 2016 on allegations of receiving the sum of N400m from the office of the former NSA through his company, Destra Investment Ltd’s bank account. The charges brought under Section 15(3) of the Money Laundering Act, are punishable with seven years imprisonment without option of fine. 

Beside himself, he had identified Jonathan and Dasuki as the remaining witnesses to close his defence. The trial had dragged since May, 2016 following the speedy conclusion of EFCC’s case against him in a record five months. 

But with the controversy generated by the attempt to bring the two politicians to court, Metuh has decided to review the subpoena with his lawyers. It is now left to be seen whether it entails removing the name of the former president and the ex-NSA’s. 

First, the bailiff reported that he could not serve the subpoena personally on Jonathan in his Abuja residence as specified in the document. Second, some supporters of Jonathan vowed to resist any attempt to ‘embarrass’ him with the summons. 

With the path for the subpoena of Dasuki cleared by the Court of Appeal, Metuh stretched further the legal rope to pull in the former president as a witness in his trial. Thus, at the resumed hearing of the case on October 23, his counsel, Onyechi Ikpeazu (SAN), made the application to subpoena Jonathan. 

In granting the application, the judge said he was relying on Section 241 (1) of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA), 2015 and the subsisting judgment of the Court of Appeal in Metuh’s case. 

“I have no option other than to sign a subpoena to compel former president Goodluck Jonathan to appear in court on October 25, 2017 to give evidence at the instance of the first defendant,” he said. 

The judge, on Tuesday October 24, reiterated the order for the appearance of Jonathan despite the information from the court registrar that the former president has not been served. This further angered the Ijaw Youth Council (IYC), who in a statement by its president, Roland Oweilaemi Pereotubo, condemned the summons and insisted that it was made with mischief and “calculated to embarrass the person and office of president Goodluck Jonathan.” 

Also, the Save Ijaw Nation Group accused Metuh of conniving with the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC) to drag down former president, Goodluck Jonathan in order to be let “off the hook.” 

Reacting to the controversy generated by the subpoena particularly, from former president Jonathan’s camp, Metuh said he has instructed his lawyers to review the issue of the subpoena even as he explained that he merely wanted him to testify to corroborate that he had no mens rea on the allegations. 

“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,” he said in the statement. 

“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,” he said.

On his part, Dasuki, in seeking to be excused from the summons, told the court that he is viewed as an accomplice in the alleged offences, having been charged in three different courts over the $2.1bn arms funds. 

Dasuki’s counsel Ahmed Raji (SAN), while arguing the application, said he is not a compellable witness, adding that he has been in detention for two years and does not have access to his records. He said he has become traumatised with the prolonged detention, and not in the state of mind to testify in the case. 

Dasuki also stated that compelling him against his wish would infringe on his constitutional right to remain silent on a charge that has been with. 

The Court of Appeal, Abuja had on September 29 ordered Justice Okon Abang of the Federal High Court in Abuja to issue the subpoena on Dasuki to testify in the trial. The appellate court set aside the ruling of the lower court that Dasuki is not a compellable witness.