The Federal High Court sitting in Abuja on Thursday refused the former spokesman of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), Chief Olisa Metuh’s bid to subpoena the Department of State Security Service (DSS) to produce former National Security Adviser (NSA), Col. Sambo Dasuki, to testify in his defence in the N400m fraud charge.
The court also refused to release Metuh’s International passport to enable him travel to London for medical treatment.
Trial judge, Justice Okon Abang in his ruling on the two applications filed by Metuh stated that having considered all the facts and arguments before the court ” it is not the duty of the court to compel anyone to give evidence for a party, unless such is compellable and it is not compulsory for the court to sign a subpoena.”
“It is my view that Dasuki is not a compellable witness to attend court to give evidence for the first defendant as such, it is not mandatory for the court to sign e subpoena. There is nothing to show that the first defendant applied to the DSS for Dasuki to appear, and if it was rejected.
“The defendant cannot come to court first without requesting the appropriate authorities. The application was not made in good faith. He made list of witnesses but the name of Dasuki was not included initially, at what stage did he change his mind, in my view, the application is an afterthought”, the court held.
Justice Abang further said that the application was made to delay trial noting that the court had previously adjourned the case more than five times on the instance of the defendants.
Similarly, the court also dismissed an application seeking for the release of his international passport for him to travel to London, for treatment on spinal cord related ailment on the grounds that, the defendant failed to appeal an order earlier granted on a similar application.
“If the applicant failed to appeal the judgement of 25th May, 2016, it is not doing the court any good by asking it to sit on an appeal in its decision. The step taken by the applicant in unlawful, abuse of court process and unconstitutional, the court lacked jurisdiction to set aside its own order.”
“The applicant should look inward and not to come to court, seeking for an order it cannot grant. The application is an abuse of judicial process, the court cannot sit as an appellate court over its own decision,” the trial Judge held.
He said, he found that the reliefs sought were same as the application the court had dismissed on 25 May 2016.
Therefore, the question arose whether the court can review it own order and direct the release of the defendant’s International passport without the earlier order been set aside. “In my view the order of 25 May subsist and the court cannot over rule itself.”
If the applicant claimed he has not being healed of his ailment and was not satisfied with that ruling why did he come back with same application instead of going to an appeal.
The judge said that applicant application was an abuse of court process and unlawful therefore the court lacked the jurisdiction to entertain it on its merits.
He said although the prosecution did not file counter affidavit opposing the defendant motion, “it is the duty of the parties to bring their own witness to testify and not the duty of the court to compel any person except it is compel able witness.”
Consequently, the court dismissed the two applications for lacked of merits.
Leave a Comment
You must be logged in to post a comment.