“The
witness is no longer the NSA, therefore his personal documents cannot
be relevant to this proceeding”, the judge held. He said it was the duty
of Metuh’s lawyer to have sought any document that would enhance his
case from ONSA before he requested Dasuki’s appearance as a witness in
the trial. Justice Abang held that the fact that Dasuki had remained in
custody of the DSS despite bail that was granted to him by different
trial courts, was not relevant to the proceeding in Metuh’s case. “The
fact that the witness is in custody of the state has nothing to do with
the ability of counsel to 1st defendant to ask questions that will
elicit relevant answers. “What is relevant is the ability of counsel to
the 1st defendant to elicit relevant evidence from the witness to
enhance the success of his case. The detention of the witness in custody
of the state is not relevant, I so hold”. He said the duty of a witness
was to give answers to questions asked by the examiner and not to give
conditions that must be met before he could answer the questions. “This
application for adjournment lacks merit, same is accordingly refused”,
Justice Abang held, even as he directed Dasuki to commence his
testimony. Led in his evidence-in-chief by Metuh’s lead counsel, Dr.
Onyechi Ikpeazu, SAN, Dasuki, said his understanding of ‘Due process
duly followed’, written as the document that authorised payment of the
N400m to the defendant, meant that all procedures that were laid down by
the ONSA and any other federal regulations, were observed. Asked if he
has ever been charged or convicted of any crime with respect to the 1st
defendant, Dasuki said: “Except in the court of public opinion, I say
No. I have not been charged or convicted of any unlawful act with
respect to the 1st defendant”. He said he was never indicted of engaging
in any unlawful act or activity with Metuh while he held sway as the
NSA. Asked who he took orders from while in office, the witness
answered: “As the NSA then, my immediate boss that I was answerable to
was the President who was Goodluck Jonathan, the President from 2010 to
2015”. While being cross-examined by EFCC lawyer, Mr. Sylvanus Tahir,
Dasuki who was asked to tell the court some of the duties of the NSA and
if the position was only meant for people with military background,
said: “Maybe you can ask the President who appointed me what he was
looking for in an NSA when he appointed me. “I will leave you with your
understanding that the office of the NSA is meant for only people with
military training or background. However, so far, I believe Dr. Bukar
Shuaibu and Prof. Galadanji where the only people that did not have
military or security background, who have occupied the office of the
NSA”. Asked the job description of the NSA, Dasuki replied: “It has
responsibility as regards issues of security, but for the details I will
refer you to the National Security Agencies Act. “The NSA to the best
of my knowledge is a public officer”. Asked if the office of the NSA is
linked or affiliated with any political party, Dasuku said “I don’t
know”. Queried if he ever met Metuh while serving as the NSA, the
witness said: “I know Chief Olisa Metuh as a person. I know he was the
Publicity Secretary of the PDP which was the party in government that I
served proudly. “I don’t personally know the 2nd defendant, but as to
whether I knew it officially, I have to make reference to my record. “I
am not aware of the relationship or transaction that existed between the
defendants and the ONSA. Not without, record, I cannot remember”. EFCC
lawyer then requested for a file of the proof of evidence already
tendered before the court, and asked Dasuki to read a document attached
to exhibit B, which was an e-payment mandate for N400m to be released to
Metuh through his company’s Diamond Bank Plc account. The payment which
was authorised on November 24, 2014, was said to be for security
services. Dasuki however, insisted before the court on Friday that the
document emanated from the prosecution who he said was “desperate to get
a conviction”. He said: “That is why I insist on getting and referring
to my own documents. This is not the original document, it is a
photocopy. On exhibit B itself, the prosecution asked the former NSA to
tell the court the services Metuh’s firm rendered to ONSA that entitled
it to the payment of N400m. Dasuki replied: “I have nothing to say. If
you want an answer then I should have access to my records. It will be
useful for the counsel to get himself acquainted with the National
Security Agencies Act”. He was then shown Exhibit D1 to which Dasuki
told the court: “I have seen that there was an entry that purports
payment from ONSA in the form of N400m into the account of Destra
Investment Ltd”. At this juncture, the prosecution asked Dasuki: “Would
it surprise you to know that the 1st defendant who is the sole signatory
of the 2nd defendant, said the 2nd defendant has never executed any
contract with any government, ministry or agency? "Before Dasuki could answer, both Metuh's lawyer and that of his firm, Mr. Tochukwu
Onwugbufor, SAN, objected, contending that it was wrong for the
prosecution to cross-examine the testimony based on falsehood. They
argued that Metuh never said such before the court, saying it would be
wrong for the EFCC to base the question on an extra-judicial statement
that was purportedly made by the 1st defendant. Consequently, the EFCC lawyer applied and withdrew the question. Under further cross-examination, Dasuki confirmed to the court that he was also facing trial before the FCT. He identified Exhibits E7 and E8 as the two separate charges against him before the FCT High Court. After
EFCC lawyer said he had no more questions for the witness, Dasuki was
asked to step down from the box and was discharged by the court. Based
on the application of Metuh's lawyer who told the court that he needed
time to review the attempt of the bailiff to effect the service of a
subpoena Justice Abang issued on 23 October to compel former President
Goodluck to also appear as a witness in the trial, the matter was
subsequently adjourned until December 4, 5 and 6. It was recalled that
Metuh had described both Jonathan and Dasuki as very crucial and vital
witnesses in his bid to defend the seven-count charge against him. Aside
allegation that he received the N400m from ONSA without executing any
contract, EFCC alleged that Metuh was involved in an illegal transaction
that involved the exchange of $ 2m.
0 Comments