From Godwin Tsa, Abuja
Reprieve came the way of former Publicity Secretary of the People’s Democratic Party (PDP), Olisa Metuh, Monday as the Abuja division Federal High Court (FHC) struck out a retrial charge filed against him by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC).
Justice Emeka Nwite in his ruling held that it was wrong for the EFCC to have brought the charge while Metuh’s appeal was still pending before the Supreme Court.
The court held that there was no way the matter could come back to his court without resolving the issues before the Supreme Court.
“I agree with the argument of the first defendant concurred by the second defendant that it is an abuse of court process and I so hold,” he said.
He consequently struck out the seven-count criminal charge in the suit marked: FHC/ABJ/CR/05/2022, as “an abuse of court process”.
In the said charge, Metuh and his company, Destral Investment Ltd, were listed as 1st and 2nd defendants.
While Metuh was represented by Afam Osigwe (SAN), his company, was represented by Tochukwu Onwugbufor, SAN.
When the case came up in court, Justice Nwite asked the prosecution counsel, Olanrewaju Adeola, about the current position of the matter.
Adeola informed the court that Metuh was convicted by the trial court and went to the Court of Appeal where the decision of the lower court was upturned.
“We challenged the decision of the Appeal Court. We understand that the matter was listed this morning at the instance of the defendant for application for his international passport,” he said.
Responding, Osigwe said that Metuh got information about the matter at the FHC on social media that this matter would commence.
He said that he had earlier had discussion with the EFCC lawyer on the current position of the matter, “because there is a pending appeal at the Supreme Court in suit number: SC/ CR/583/2021 between FG Vs Olisa Metuh and another”.
“In that appeal, EFCC as a prosecution seeks, among others, the Supreme Court’s order, reinstating the order of this Hon court which was set aside by the Court of Appeal.
“So in the light of the reliefs sought in that appeal, it will amount to an abuse of court process for a fresh prosecution to be commenced when they are asking for reinstatement.
“My learned friend representing the EFCC will also agree with me that this court will either stay proceeding or strike out the application,” he said.
Read also:LASU governing council reinstates Solagberu as LASUCOM Provost
Onwugbufor, who spoke in the same vein, said he filed a motion; a written application before the court to clear any doubt about the position of the suit.
“The application is dated September 20, 2022 and filed on September 22, 2022,” he said.
He said after the appeal by Metuh and his company at the Court of Appeal, it was decided that the judgment of the FHC was a nullity and ordered a new trial.
He said besides the prosecution which appealed against that judgment at the Supreme Court, Metuh and his company also appealed against the said Appeal Court judgment.
The senior lawyer said that the anti-corruption agency approached the apex court on the ground that the Appeal Court did not determine the whole appeal.
“Actually, what was determined at appeal was the issue of bias. But the EFCC is asking that the FHC judgment should either be reinstated or send back to Court of Appeal for retrial.
“My client is also asking the Supreme Court that the Appeal Court did not take into consideration that the whole trial was a nullity and should be dismissed in its entirety and discharge and acquitted the defendants,” he said.
Onwugbufor said that was why he came with the motion on notice to enable the court determine whether it could try Metuh or not.
Adeola, who represented the EFCC, however prayed that rather than striking out the suit, the court should adjourn the matter sine die (indefinitely) pending the hearing and determination of the appeal before the apex court.
“The submission of first and second defendants’ counsel are to the effect that the charge be struck out or on the alternative, be adjourned sine die.
“For prosecution, we don’t have any problem with that sir.
“But in the interest of justice, the prosecution will be more comfortable if the matter was adjourned sine die,” he said.
However, Osigwe argued that Adeola’s submission was an admission that the present charge was an abuse of court process, urging the court to do the needful.
He further said that striking out the suit would not be prejudicial to the commission in any way.
“This suit cannot be pending in the light of the appeal pending before the Supreme Court and the proper order is to strike it out because the prosecution will not lose anything for striking it out,” he added.
Corroborating Osigwe’s argument, Onwugbufor said though the court had the discretion to either strike out or adjourn the matter indefinitely, he stressed that even after the apex court’s decision on the matter, he doubted if the matter would be reassigned to Nwite.
“This is so because the matter can be heard at Appeal Court and it will go back to Supreme Court for final decision.
“So I urge my lord to strike it out,” he said.