By Vivian Okejeme, Abuja
The Department of the State Service(DSS), Thursday, sought the leave of the court to represent exhibits once rejected by the court in the trial of former National Security Adviser NSA, Col. Sambo Dasuki.
The prosecution agency has dragged the Ex NSA boss to court since 2015 on an amended 7-count charge of alleged unlawful possession of firearms and money-laundering.
When the matter was called up Thursday, counsel to DSS, Oladipupo Okpeseyi SAN, request to represent the previously rejected exhibits.
The DSS, through Okpeseyi, applied orally to Justice Lifu to shift the sitting of the court to DSS Headquarters in Abuja for the purpose of inspecting some vehicles said to have been recovered in Dasuki’s house during 2015 search warrant.
He said that the vehicles have been parked at the DSS headquarters in the past 10 years and should be inspected by the court for the purpose of admitting them as exhibits against Dasuki.
Justice Peter Lifu requested to know the nature of the exhibits to be inspected at the DSS headquarters.
In response, the prosecution said that they were those listed on the search warrant as items 18 to 28 and recovered from the Abuja house of the retired Army Officer.
When reminded that the exhibits have been rejected and marked rejected by the same court, the senior lawyer claimed that he has right to represent them for the court to admit against the defendant.
While arguing his application for representation of the rejected exhibits, Okpeseyi SAN cited several authorities adding that the exhibits were marked rejected in the previous proceedings because the foundation for tendering them for admission at the time was not properly laid.
He said he has now relaid the foundation insisted that the exhibits were rejected merely on improper foundation for admission and not on their irrelevance to the trial and urged the court to grant his request.
Objecting the request, counsel to Dasuki, Mr A. A Usman said that the application by Okpeseyi SAN was strange and unknown to law, adding that once an exhibit is rejected and marked so by court, such exhibit stands rejected.
Usman submitted that Justice Peter Lifu, having taken a decision on the exhibits cannot revisit the same exhibits and admit them through the back door.
He read out the earlier ruling of the Judge where it was clearly stated that the rejected exhibits have no relevance to the alleged unlawful possession of firearms and thus, failed the test of admissibility.
He argued that the only option opened to the DSS was to go to the Court of Appeal to challenge the earlier rejection of the exhibits rather than inviting the same Judge to sit as an Appeal Court on the same matter.
Therefore , he prayed the court to throw away the application as baseless, ill conceived, misplaced, unwarranted and a ploy to draw the hand of clock backward.
Meantime, Justice Lifu fixed October 14 to deliver ruling in the application.
