Dasuki Paid N400m Into Metuh’s Company Account – Diamond Bank

A staff of Diamond Bank, Eno-Mfon Effiong who is also an account officer of the five accounts belonging Metuh and his company, Destra Investments Limited with Diamond Bank has told a Federal High Court how the sum of N400 million was paid into the account of the company by the Office of the National Security Adviser (ONSA).
The witness who was testifying as Prosecution Witness said on November 24, 2014 the account of Destra Investments Limited was credited with N400 million from the office of the NSA under code CBN/CIFTS/MAT SEC ADBIS, which in simple terms means that it is a credit from the ONSA.
Effiong told the court that the balance on the account of Destra Investments Limited before the credit from the NSA on November 24, 2014 was N6,676,576.06.
But after examination of the PW4, Etiaba argued that the document presented by the prosecution as evidence lacks certificate of identification.
Etiaba said the letter submitted by the prosecution cannot be admitted by the court.
He argued the admissibility of a letter from issued by Diamond Bank to the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) on January 5, 2016.
He said: “In line with Section 104 of the Evidence Act, every letter must be backed by an evidence of payment for the certificate of identification supporting the statement of account.’‘
He also said that for the period in question, a certificate was made over a year after to accompany the letter.
He said the witness in the box is also not the originator of the document. Etiaba therefore rejected the letter supporting the document presented by the prosecution.
But in his objection, the prosecuting counsel, Sylvester Tahir prayed the court to overrule Etiaba’s objection.
Tahir said: “The objection by the defendant is without basis and amounts to a mere scum.”
He further referred the court to a similar objection yesterday, January 26 by the defendant which he recalled was overruled by the court.
But overruling the objection, the judge Okon Abang said Diamond Bank is not a party to the matter before the court.
He said: “For this purpose, Diamond Bank is an agent of the prosecutor.”
He however said that any document presented legally by the prosecution can be tendered through the witness.
He said a letter issued by a private person to a public institution becomes a public document in line with section 103 (b) of the Evidence Act.
He ruled that the documents are admissible to the court as they do not require certification and remains immaterial that the witness is not the originator of the document but a staff of an agent of the prosecution.
Meanwhile, the case has been adjourned to Thursday, January 28.