Abba Kyari Drug Trial: Court Orders NDLEA to Produce List Of NDLEA Personnel On Duty
Justice Emeka Nwite of a Federal High Court, Abuja, has directed the Chairman of the National Drug Law Enforcement Agency (NDLEA) to produce in court the list of the personnel who were on duty on January 19, 2022 at the Akanu Ibiam International Airport.
The judge issued the directive, following a request by the former head of the defunct Police Intelligence Response Team (IRT), Deputy Commissioner of Police, Abba Kyari and Inspector Simon Agirgba.
Recall that Kyari, alongside four other suspended IRT officers, including the two now convicted drug traffickers, were initially being prosecuted by the NDLEA on eight-count charge bordering on alleged dealing in hard drugs.
According to the NDLEA, Kyari and the officers tempered with the exhibit (cocaine) the IRT officers recovered from some arrested drug traffickers at the Ibiam airport.
The four officers are ACP Sunday J. Ubua; ASP Bawa James, Insp. Simon Agirgba and Insp. John Nuhu, named as 2nd to 5th defendants respectively.
Although the two convicted drug traffickers, Chibunna Umeibe and Emeka Ezenwanne, listed as 6th and 7th defendants, pleaded guilty to the counts, Kyari and his men pleaded not guilty to the counts against them.
At the resumed trial on Monday, NDLEA’s lawyer, Joseph Sunday, informed the court that the matter was scheduled for continuation of hearing, adding that the prosecution was ready to proceed, subject to the convenience of the court.
Responding, Julius Mba, counsel to Kyari and Agirgba, while stating that the case was slated for continuation of the evidence of the 2nd defence witness (DW-2), John Nwonke, who is a subpoenaed witness, however, said unfortunately, there was a letter filed on behalf of the same witness, informing that he was ill.
He said the letter, dated October 2, was addressed to the deputy chief registrar of the court and that the lead defence counsel, Onyechi Ikpeazu, SAN, was also copied.
The lawyer told the court that Nwonke was ill at the moment and they were only praying that he gets well to continue and conclude his evidence.
“On that note, we may not be able to put in a witness today because this is a criminal trial and a very serious one at that matter,” he said.
Mba stated further that they had the instruction of Ikpeazu, who was representing Kyari and Agirgba, but unavoidably absent, to equally file a “subpoena duces tecum” to be served on the NDLEA boss.
He said the subpoena duces tecum was filed on September 30 and graciously signed by Justice Nwite on October 2.
“But we only received this, this morning my lord,” he said.
According to him, the subpoena duces tecum is requiring the NDLEA, through the DG, to produce before this court for inspection and use of this honourable court, the certified true copy of all the list of personnel of the agency who were on duty on January 19, 2022, at Akanu Ibiam International Airport, Enugu State for proper consideration and for the defence of 1st and 4th defendants.
A subpoena duces tecum is a legal court order that commands a person or business to bring specific physical or digital evidence to a legal proceeding.
Responding, the NDLEA lawyer said he was just seeing Nwonke’s letter.
The lawyer argued that his objection was predicated on the fact that the application was in bad taste which was calculated to subvert the administration of criminal practice.
On the issue of subpoena, the NDLEA lawyer said none of the prosecution team had been served with the letter.
“We don’t conduct trial by ambush. We are not aware of any subpoena my lord,” he said.
The lawyer, who urged the court to order the defence to proceed on their next witness, prayed the court to foreclose Nwonke’s evidence “and treat him as having given a testimony that was not subjected to cross-examination.”
In a short ruling, Justice Nwite held that Nwonke (DW-2)’s letter was not convincing enough for the court to grant the request for an adjournment.
The judge, however, held that in the interest of justice, the case would be adjourned until October 7 for the continuation of the witness’ testimony and cross-examination.
“Failure of the witness to appear on the said date means that his testimony will be foreclosed,” he ruled.
The judge also ordered lawyers to the 1st to 5th defendants to submit to the court the names of the witnesses they intend to call before the next adjourned date.
