The refusal of the Department of the State Security Service (DSS) to
\nproduce former National Security Adviser, Col Sambo Dasuki before an FCT
\nHigh Court today, stalls the trial of the Ex-NSA.<\/p>\n
At the resumed hearing, Rotimi Jacob who is prosecuting for the Economic
\nand Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) informed Justice Husseini Baba
\nYusuf that the defendant refused to come to court on the ground that his
\nlawyers, Joseph Daudu and Ahmed Raji would not be in court.<\/p>\n
The prosecutor told the court that he persuaded the defendant to come to
\ncourt to see how the proceedings would be conducted but claimed that the
\ndefendant did not yield to his persuasion. He therefore asked the court to
\nbegin the trial in the absence of the defendant since the business of the
\ncourt slated was the trial to commence.<\/p>\n
Jacob also told the court that an operative of DSS told him that the
\ncounsels to the defendant have never made any attempt to come into the DSS
\nOffice to see their client who has been in their custody since December
\nlast year. Rotimi Jacob alleged that the refusal of the defendant to come
\nto court was a ploy to scuttle the trial.<\/p>\n
However, in a vehement opposition to the claim of the prosecution, Mr.
\nWale Balogun who stood for Dasuki, urged Justice Baba Yusuf to disregard
\nthe claim of the prosecution adding that up to this moment, the counsel to
\nthe defendant have not been allowed to have access to their client in the
\ncustody of the DSS.<\/p>\n
Balogun said that the claim of Jacob that an operative of DSS told him
\n(Jacob) that Dasuki\u2019s lawyers never made attempts to see him in the
\ncustody was baseless and unwarranted because he was quoting a third-party.
\nDasuki\u2019s lawyer said on the contrary it was the DSS and the prosecution
\nthat scuttle the trial by their deliberate refusal to produce the
\ndefendant who has been in their custody since last year in court.<\/p>\n
The counsel claimed that Rotimi Jacob as the prosecutor cannot give
\nevidence from the bar on why the defendant was not brought to court.
\nAdding that what he ought to have done was to have filed an affidavit
\nevidence to explain to the court why the defendant was not in court.<\/p>\n
Balogun stood his ground that the accused cannot be tried in his absence
\nand without access to his lawyers to prepare effective defence adding that
\nthe prosecution will continue to bungle the trial until they resolved to
\nobey the rule of law and take necessary steps required by law.<\/p>\n
The position of Dasuki\u2019s lawyer was adopted by lawyers standing for other
\ndefendants in the criminal charges brought against Dasuki.<\/p>\n
Justice Baba Yusuf, in his comment, agreed that the business of court was
\nfor trial to commence but noted that that cannot be done in the absence of
\nthe defendant and without the permission of the court. The Judge said he
\nwould have agreed with the prosecution (Rotimi Jacob) that lawyers to
\nDasuki have not made any effort to access their clients in the custody.
\nAdding that it was clear that the information dished out to the court by
\nJacob was hearsay obtained from unnamed DSS Operatives.<\/p>\n
The judge, therefore agreed with the defence counsel on the need to
\nadjourned the case. Consequently, Justice Baba Yusuf adjourned the matter
\ntill April 6, 2016 for the prosecution to produce the defendant in court.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
The refusal of the Department of the State Security Service (DSS) to produce former National Security Adviser, Col Sambo Dasuki before an FCT High Court today, stalls the trial of…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":46320,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[17],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-47809","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-exclusive"],"yoast_head":"\n