- A Federal High Court in Abuja has adjourned the fraud case involving PDP’s former national publicity secretary, Olisa Metuh, to December 6
- Metuh is being tried for alleged diversion of N400 million from the office of the former NSA, Sambo Dasuki, during the administration of former president Goodluck Jonathan
- The court adjourned the case to December 6
A Federal High Court sitting in Abuja has adjourned the N400 million fraud case involving a former national publicity secretary of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), Olisa Metuh, to December 6, Premium Times reports.
Legit.ng gathered that the judge presiding over the case, Justice Abang, said the defence team had over 30 days, during which they would have organized their next witness.
He said: “This court on 3 November adjourned till December 4. The first defendant had over 30 days to prepare his next witness."
Olisa Metuh is currently facing trial of alleged diversion of N400 million from the office of the former national security adviser, Sambo Dasuki, during the administration of former president Goodluck Jonathan.
Legit.ng had previously reported that former president Goodluck Jonathan, had explained why he would not be testifying in the ongoing trial of Metuh.
In an application filed by the former president before Justice Okon Abang of the federal high court, Jonathan said appearing as a witness in Metuh's trial will expose him to criminal trial.
PAY ATTENTION: Read the news on Nigeria’s #1 news app
Meanwhile, Legit.ng had previously reported that the Federal High Court sitting in Lagos on Monday, December 4, adjourned hearing of former first lady, Patience Jonathan's suit seeking to unfreeze her accounts till January 19, 2018.
The accounts reportedly have a total of $15.5 million.
Justice Mohammed Idris adjourned the case to enable Patience Jonathan’s lawyers to respond to an objection filed by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC).
The report said the judge had, on May 8, declared that Dame Jonathan and other parties in the case must give oral evidence on the ownership of the money because the counter-affidavits of the defendants contained disputed facts that could not be decided without oral evidence.
The EFCC stage a walk against corruption - on Legit.ng TV