Metuh Closes Defence in N400m Money Laundering Trial – TheNigerialawyer

Former National Publicity Secretary of the Peoples Democratic
Party (PDP), Chief Olisa Metuh, wednesday closed argument in his
ongoing trial before Justice Okon Abang of the Federal High Court,
Abuja.

He had called 15 witnesses to prove his innocence of the money
laundering charges brought against him by the Economic and
Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC).

The EFCC is prosecuting Metuh alongside his company, Destra
Investment Limited, on seven-count charges bordering on money
laundering to the tune of N400 million, which he received from the
Office of the National Security Adviser in the lead up to the 2015
general election.

It could be recalled that the court in 2018 issued an order for
Metu to close his case, but had to vacate it to enable him call
more witnesses.

At the court session on Friday, September 27, 2019, Metuh, who
is the 15th witness in his matter, told the court under
cross-examination by the prosecution counsel, Sylvanus Tahir, that
there was never an instance where former President Goodluck
Jonathan directly gave any money to him, saying that his collection
of N400 million (from Col. Sambo Dasuki, former NSA) was for a
national assignment as directed by the then president.

At today’s trial, the prosecution counsel presented a Diamond
Bank document which captured the details of the transactions
carried out by Metuh and his company, Destra Investment
Limited.

The defence counsel indicated a desire to cross-examine Metuh on
the tendered documents but the prosecution objected on the grounds
that the matter was not a fresh charge.

Destra Investment’s counsel, Mr Tochukwu Onwugbufor argued that
the prosecution had turned Metuh into its witness by introducing
new evidence, that he was entitled to cross-examine Metuh on the
bank documents.

But Tahir opposed the application, arguing that it was
misconceived and not supported by provisions of the Evidence
Act.

Justice Abang, relying on sections 215(3), 216 and 217 of the
Evidence Act, upheld the argument of the prosecution and refused
the application of the defence counsel to cross-examine Metuh.

According to the judge, Section 216 of the Evidence Act was of
no assistance to the defence, while Section 217 was of no
relevance, noting that the defence cannot argue that the document
contained fresh issues to alter provisions of the Evidence Act.

He further stated that it was not mandatory for counsel of the
second defendant (Destra Investment) to cross-examine Metuh on the
bank documents, saying such can only happen at the discretion of
the court.

Justice Abang adjourned the matter to October 7, 2019, for
continuation of trial and for other pending applications to be
heard.