The former publicity secretary of the People’s Democratic Party (PDP), Olisa Metuh, will on Feb.25, 2020 know whether or not he will go to jail over the N400m he allegedly collected from the Office of National Security Adviser (ONSA).
A Federal High Court in Abuja fixed the date for judgment after all the parties in the suit on Tuesday adopted their briefs for and against.
Justice Okon Abang, who fixed the judgment date, said the judgment would have been ready before then.
In the final written address, the prosecution counsel, Tahir Sylvanus, urged the court to convict Metuh based on evidence established against him, while the defence team on the order hand, urged the court to dischare and acquit him, as the prosecution had failed woefully in establishing any case against him.
Metuh 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 prosecuted Metuh alongside his company, Destra Investment Limited, on a seven-count charge bordering on money laundering to the tune of N400m he collected from the ONSA in the build up to the 2015 general election.
The court had in 2018 issued an order for Metu to close his case, but had to vacate it to enable him call more witnesses.
On September 27, 2019, Metuh who testified as 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 N400m from Col. Sambo Dasuki (former NSA) was for a national assignment as directed by the then President.
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 prosecution called eight witnesses, Metuh called a total of 15 witnesses, while his company, called only one witness.
When the case came up on Tuesday, the defence team, comprising, Abel Ozioko, who appeared for Metuh and Tochukwu Onwugbufor (SAN), urged the court to discharge and acquit their clients on the grounds that the prosecution failed to prove the alleged offences.
But Tahir maintained that his team had proved all the offences charged beyond reasonable doubt, as he called on the judge to pass a guilty verdict on the defendants.
While adopting his brief of arguments, counsel to Metuh, Ozioko, urged the court to discharge and acquit his client, submitted that a total of 11 witnesses including a prosecution witness have testified as receiving various sums of money from Metuh both in cash and cheques as contained in exhibit G20, which has remained an unchallenged evidence.
He submitted that the testimony of Metuh was collaborated by witnesses to the fact that former President Jonathan gave him an assignment on security issues, which was not challenged by the prosecution.
Ozioko further urged the court to note that exhibit B E, which is the e-payment mandate with certification shows that all payments with regards to the N400m complied with the statutory requirement.
He submitted that instead of vilifying former President Jonathan, he should take credit for the manner in which he handled the insecurity situation in the country before the 2015 elections, using Metuh to achieve peace and oneness for the country.
The defence lawyer further submitted that the prosecution did not fulfilled the condition of a predicate to establish that the source of the money is illicit to warrant a charge of money laundering to be file against his client.
He urged the court to hold that having failed to establish any case against Metuh, the only inescapable conclusion was to discharge and acquit him.
On his part, counsel to Destral Investment Limited, Onwugbufor (SAN), challenged the jurisdiction of the court to hear matters bordering on simple contract.
He submitted that the issue of the source of money should first be determined by the court in order to establish a case of money laundering.
According to Onwugbufor, the N400m was legitimately provided and transferred to the second defendant.
He decried the failure to call former President Jonathan to give evidence because only his evidence would have shown whether he authorised money or not.
The senior lawyer argued that throughout the trial, the prosecution never responded to the origin of that money, adding that the failure of the prosecution to respond to this issue which is highlighted in their addresses was deemed to have accepted and admitted all the points and issues raised therein.
“Having conceded same, the court is urged to hold that the origin of the money is legitimate and if that is so, the entire charge of money laundering must fail.”
But the prosecution counsel on his part, urged the court to convict the defendants as the prosecution had proved his case beyond reasonable doubt.
He submitted that money laundering is a global offence and that section 15(6) of the Money Laundering Prohibition Act 2011 catalogued a list of predicate offences that can give rise to money laundering including Criminal breach of trust.
Tahir submitted that under that law, “there is nowhere that prosecution must prove predicate offence before money laundering Offences can be proved”.
Felix Omohomhion, Abuja
