N400m fraud: I did’t commit unlawful activity with Metuh, says Dasuki

Former National Security Adviser (NSA) Col. Mohammed Sambo Dasuki (rtd ), said on Friday he did not commit any unlawful act with the former Publicity Secretary of Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) Chief Olisa Metuh and his Destra Investment Limited.

He also told the court that he has not been charged or convicted by any court in respect of the alleged offences which Metuh is being tried except in the public court by the media.

Metuh and his company Destra Investment limited are facing trial before the Federal High Court over the N400m payment from the Office of National Security Adviser (ONSA) and the court had subpoenaed Dasuki based on Metuh request to testify .

Dasuki said when led in evidence by 1st defendant counsel, Dr. Onyechi Ikpeazu (SAN) that his understanding of due process were followed, “is that all laid down procedures at the Office of National Security Adviser (ONSA) and other agencies have been observed.”

The witness said that he served as the NSA between June 2012 and July 2015, and that his immediate boss was the former President, Goodluck Jonathan.

Under cross examination by the prosecution counsel ,Sylvanus Tahir, the witness said that only President Jonathan could explain “what he was looking for when he appointed him as the NSA.”

“I will leave you with the little understanding that the National Security Adviser is meant to be occupied by people with military background,” he said but added that Dr Buka Shuaibu and Prof. Galadanchi have held the post without military background.

On what are the jobs description of an NSA? Dasuki said that it is not something he could state off hand in details because there are about national security.

He referred the lawyer to the NSA Act for the detail of the functions of that office, particularly if he want to know whether the NSA office is connected to non- governmental organisation or companies.

According to Dasuki the NSA Act spelt out the functions of NSA and answered the question if the NSA is linked or affiliated with any political party.

” I know Olisa Metuh, the former Publicity Secretary of the PDP, the party that was in government that I proudly served .”

Whether he knew Metuh’s company the Destra Investment ltd, officially, Dasuki said: ” I have to make reference to my record to answer the question.”

“I am not aware if relationship existed between ONSA and the company except I refer to my record, I can not say”.

When confronted with e-payment mandate issued by ONSA , that has been marked as exhibit (b)Dasuki said that is an “e- payment schedule issued in respect of Destra Investment ltd . He also read entering on it that stated the sum of N400m was credited to Destra Investment limited account with Diamond bank on 24 Nov 2014.

However he insisted that the document was from the prosecution, adding that is why he is insiting should be allowed to get his record . He said that the document presented to him was not “an original copy but photocopy”. He said his name was ” typed on the document and what appeared to be his signature.”

On what service did the Destra investment Limited rendered to entitled it to N400m payment, Dasuki said:”I have nothing to say. If you want an answer let my have my record . It will be useful for the counsel to avail himself of the NSA Act.”

The witness was also shown exhibit (D) (1), a letter from Diamond bank dated 4th Nov. 2014, and he said I have seen the document produced that purported to be payment of N400m to the Destra Investment ltd .

He said that to the best of his knowledge he was not standing trial along with Metuh but on two separate suits before the FCT high court in respect of the office.

Earlier before Dasuki gave his evidence , the judge, Justice Okon Abang had overruled the witness request for an adjournment for more time to enable him fetch his records.

In refusing Dasuki application the judge said the witness was not bound to answer question in any particular manner.

He said that defence counsel would have used his skill to ask the witness who first appeared in court on Wednesday, relevant questions.

There were sufficient materials in evidence before the court that would have enable counsel to ask question instead of asking adjournment.

Justice Abang said that the would take it that
the answers the witness gave during Wednesday sitting represented his testimony on this matter . His personnel document can not be relevant to the court and the the court can not grant an adjournment for the defendant witness to procure document.

The fact that the witness is in custody of state has nothing to do with his testimony.

The matter has been adjourned to December 4th to enable bailiff serve subpoena on President Jonathan .