To: Professor Itse
Sagay SAN
Former Dean
University of Benin
Chairman PACAC
Sir,
Please Sir we have
not heard from Mr Oliseh Metuh what happened in respect of paper shreds.
Maybe the state
agents wrote Metuh’s statement and presented it to him to sign and he was angry
that he was being compelled to sign a statement he did not originate?
Uncle if that is
the scenario, as you know, the law does
not compel the making of a statement.
Uncle, the President
also ‘swallowed’? 2016 budget or so it was alleged that he withdrew a budget or
it disappeared we don’t know exactly what transpired. Maybe the President was
hiding something we don’t know because the budget was circulated online 2-3 weeks
ago and Nigerians critiqued the budget of profligacy including the Nation,
Punch et al. Maybe Metuh tore his statement, a statement tainted. Was it
voluntary? We don’t know. Let him speak Sir.
Uncle assuming N6.08
Trillion budget and Olisah Metuh’s statement both shredded? Both erred which is
a bigger crime, to ‘shred’ a N6.08 Trillion Budget or to ‘shred’ N400 Million
statement?
Considering one was
shredded under chains, ie Metuh’s and the other shredded with levity and
liberty. And could Mr President make public the version of the budget he selects.
Buhari/Aso Villa could create something like Whitehouse blog; recall his July
2015 trip to Washington D.C. first official trip as President, received by
Obama to assist shape certain democratic traits of transparency and
accountability and respect for human rights, with a view to building a vibrant citizenry,
a virile democracy and a Great Nation for people of all creeds in any cranny or
creek.
Best regards Sir
Yours respectfully,
Carole
$2.1b cash: Metuh under fire for tearing statement
Lawyers
said yesterday that the fact that Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) spokesman
Olisa Metuh tore his statement at the Economic and Financial Crimes Commisssion
(EFCC) does not in any way stop him from prosecution.
They
said that the EFCC could still proceed with his prosecution for alleged
involvement in the $2.1 billion arms scam.
They
include Professor of Law, Itsay Sagay(SAN), Professor Kanyisola Ajayi(SAN),
Felix Fagbohungbe (SAN), Wahab Shittu, Chairman, Nigerian Bar Association
(NBA), Ikeja Branch, Yinka Farounbi, member, Ogun State Judicial Service
Commission, Abayomi Omoyinmi and National President of the Committee for the Defence
of Human Rights (CDHR) Malachy Ugwummadu.
Sagay
said what Metuh did amounted to a criminal act and that the EFCC could
prosecute him for criminal conduct.
“It
is a bad example by somebody of his status,” he said.
Metuh is a lawyer.
Sagay said the torn statement could still be tendered in
court if the pieces could be put together, adding that “it would be as valid as
it was not torn”.
Prof. Ajayi said the EFCC’s prosecution has not
been jeopardised by the alleged tearing of Metuh’s confessional statement.
He said: “The alleged tearing up of the confessional
statement shouldn’t affect the EFCC’s prosecution. The EFCC as an organisation
will most likely have other evidence to support its case before it proceeds to
court. It should have other things in store that’ll prove that the crime it
alleged was committed was indeed committed by the defendant.”
To Fagbohungbe, Metuh’s conduct does not show him as being of
good character, having regard to his position in the PDP. Tearing the statement
has no justification, he said, adding that Metuh may have torn the statement
after discovering that he wrote incriminating things against himself.
“His action will raise a lot of suspicion in the mind of
security agents. It is a suspicious conduct,” Fagbohungbe said.
Shittu, who teaches law at the University of Lagos (UNILAG)
said Metuh’s action cannot stop his trial.
“What is important is for the case against him to be
water-tight and for the prosecution to be able to prove its case beyond
reasonable doubt,” he said.
Omoyinmi said the implication of what Metuh did is
that he could be charged with wilful destruction of property belonging to the
government because the matter at hand is a criminal offence.
He said Metuh’s act does not in any way jeopardise his
arraignment as long as there is enough evidence related to the offence for
which he was arrested.
He maintained that once a prima facie case had been
established against him, the EFCC could go ahead with his prosecution “even
with or without a torn statement”.
Farounbi described the development as unfortunate. “If the
statement is not badly torn, it could be used; otherwise it will constitute a
separate offence and the torn paper constitutes an exhibit against him,” he
said.
Ugwummadu said if indeed the attempted destruction
of the confessional statement took place, it exposes Metuh’s level of civility.
He said: “The idea of tearing up a confessional statement, if
indeed it happened, exposes the thuggish nature of the person in question. It
exposes his level of civility. If you have made a statement and you intend to
challenge the voluntariness of the statement, what you do is not to tear up
that statement.”
Ugwummadu suggested that the statement can be subjected to a
trial within trial in court.
“In addition, under the Administration of Criminal Justice
Act (ACJA) 2015, for an accused person to volunteer information to a law
enforcement agency, such as the EFCC, such a person should have in his company
his own lawyer.
“Secondly, there would be, like has been adopted under the
Lagos State Criminal Law, a video coverage of that procedure. So, if Olisa
Metuh feels threatened or witch-hunted, what he should do is to insist that all
of these things are available before he makes his statement,” he said
As for the EFCC’s chances of securing a conviction, Ugwummadu
added: ”Convictions are not only secured through confessional statements.
Whereas it would have been easier, faster and less complex for the prosecution
to establish its case with a confessional statement, it is not the only way by
which a conviction can be secured.”
No comments:
Post a Comment