N400m fraud: You have a case to answer, Supreme Court tells Metuh

The Supreme Court on Friday held that a former National Publicity Secretary of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP),Chief Olisa Metuh and his firm, Destra Investment Limited, have case to answer in the seven-count charge before Justice Okon Abang of the Federal High Court in Abuja.

The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) is prosecuting Metuh and his firm) (Destra Investment), following their alleged involvement in about N400million and $2million money laundering charge.

Dissatisfied with the Court of Appeal decision, Metuh and his firm had lodged separate appeals at the Supreme Court, asking the apex court to overturn both the Court of Appeal and the Federal High Court pronouncements on the matter.

But a five-man panel of the Supreme Court in a unanimous decision on Friday, struck out the two separate appeals fby Metuh and Destra Investments and affirmed the May 25, 2016 judgment of the Court of Appeal in Abuja.

The Supreme Court agreed with the lower court decision that both appeals were incompetent. The apex court further upheld the March 9, 2016 ruling of Justice Okon Abang of the Federal High Court in Abuja who dismissed the defendants’ no-case submission.

The judgment of the Court of Appeal which was affirmed by the apex court on Friday had held that the appeals by Metuh and his firm failed to comply with constitutional requirement.

According to the Court of Appeal, Metuh and his company failed to first obtain the leave of either the trial court or the appellate court before filing a notice of appeal as required by the 1999 Constitution (as amended) when filing an appeal against an interlocutory decision, on the grounds of mixed law and facts.

The Court of Appeal had held that Metuh and his firm, having failed in that regard, their appeals were incompetent and the court lacked jurisdiction to hear them.

Justice Dattijo Mohammed headed the five-man panel of the apex court and prepared the lead judgment of the Supreme Court which affirmed the decision of the Court of Appeal on Friday.

In Justice Mohammed’s judgment which was read on his behalf by Justice Ejembi Eko, the apex court resolved all the three issues raised in the appeals against Metuh and his firm.

The apex court also held that as much as the Court of Appeal lacked the jurisdiction to hear the appeals, the Supreme Court too could not entertain the appeal arising from the incompetent appeals before the court below.

Affirming the decision of the Court of Appeal, the Supreme Court held that, “By section 233 (2) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended), appeals from the Court of Appeal to this court lies only against the decisions of that court.

“Such decisions evolve from the Court of Appeal upon the exercise of jurisdiction over appeals from the court below.

“Where the Court of Appeal lacks the necessary jurisdiction, in the first place, to hear and determine the appeal before it, such as in the instant case, no decision of the court against the competent appeal lies to this court.

“It is for that reason I strike out the incompetent appeal and affirm the judgment of the lower court below.”
Other members of the panel – Justices Kudirat Kekeree-Ekun, John Okoro, Chima Nweze and Ejembi Eko – concurred with the lead judgment.

The EFCC is prosecuting Metuh and his firm, Destra Investments Limited, on seven counts of money laundering involving allegations of receiving N400m fraudulently from the Office of the National Security Adviser in 2014.

They were also accused of transacting with $2m cash said to be above the threshold of cash transactions prescribed by the Money Laundering (Prohibition) Act.

Metuh, who had been complaining of ill health as he continued his defence before the Federal High Court, was brought to court on a stretcher on February 5, 2018.

Justice Abang, on the grounds of Metuh’s ill health adjourned till March 14 for continuation of trial to enable him to recover.

The judge had in his March 29, 2016 ruling, dismissed the no-case submission which Metuh and his company filed after the prosecution closed its case after calling eight witnesses.

After the ruling of the Federal High Court, Metuh had commenced his defence and had since called a number of witnesses while he and his company continued to pursue their appeals against Justice Abang’s ruling.

After upholding the notices of preliminary objection filed by EFCC’s lawyer, Mr. Sylvanus Tahir, the Court of Appeal had proceeded to decide the appeals on merits.

The appellate court ruled that the trial judge, Justice Abang, was right to have dismissed the appellant’s no-case submission.

The appeal court also affirmed the order of Justice Abang directing them to enter their defence as there was prima facie case against them.

In his ruling ,Justice Abang also stated that entering their defence would enable them to offer explanations about the allegations levelled against him.

The judge had explained in the opening of his ruling that the court was not expected at the stage to make findings on the guilt or otherwise of the accused.

He added that the court could also not make pronouncement on the credibility of the prosecution witnesses that had testified.

After the prosecution closed its case with eight witnesses, Metuh and his firm through their lawyers, filed a no-case submission, asking the court to discharge and acquit them on the grounds that the prosecution failed to make any prima facie case against them.

But the judge ruled against Metuh and his firm , holding that the prosecution’s case had raised so many questions, which the defendants needed “to urgently answer”.

He held that the evidence given by the prosecution’s third and seventh witnesses as well as Exhibits D1 and E6(1) to (4) linked Metuh and his company to the alleged crime.

He added, “It is only the first defendant (Metuh) that can answer the questions. The first defendant admitted in his statement that the the second defendant (Destra) received N400m on November 24, 2014.

“Did the first‎ defendant inquire from the bank the source of this money? If he did, what did he do?
“If he did not ask from the bank why did he not report to the police or even the EFCC to investigate it. If he did
not why did he disburse the fund to the 5th and 7th prosecution witnesses? Did he also disburse part of the money to Chief Anenih as contained in count seven.

“If he answer this question it will be clear if the defendants knew or reasonably ought to have know that the fund represented proceeds of corrupt and criminal breach of trust by Col. Sambo Dasuki, while being the National Security Adviser.”

Andrew Orolua, Abuja.