The federal government has clarified why Sambo Dasuki, immediate past national security adviser, can’t leave Nigeria for medical treatment in United Kingdom.
A court in Abuja on November 13, Friday, again ordered the Department of State Security Services to leave the house of ex-NSA.
Dasuki had canceled his Lufthansa flight to the United Kingdom when he received the news that the DSS had plans to re-arrest him at the airport on November 4.
The government said former NSA has to explain some issues connecting to fresh allegations of money laundering against him.
Assistant to the former president appealed to a court claiming that men of the DSS threatened to his life and stopped him from traveling abroad to attend to his indisposed health consistent to an earlier order by Justice Ademola.
However, the FG had rejected the accusation and filed a counter affidavit to Dasuki’s gesture dated November 9, said the DSS was only acting its legal responsibilities.
In the counter affidavit the government said: “that the complainant has not in any way violated the order of this court granted on September 1 and November 3”.
“The defendant is undergoing an investigation for other laundering offences other than the ones already before the court in charge No: FHC/ABJ/CR/319/2015; the fact that the defendant is standing trial for one offence does not exculpate him from being investigated for other fresh money laundering offences.
“The Department of State Services (DSS) has not and never obstructed or interferes with the liberty of the defendant, his visitors or any member of his family or access to his residence located at No 13 John Kadiya Street, Asokoro District, Abuja contrary to what was contained in exhibit C1 and C2.
“The DSS detailed a senior officer to invite the defendant/applicant for an audience with the DSS, which he declined. The DSS wrote a formal letter of invitation requesting the defendant/applicant for a meeting with the DSS to make some clarifications on matters under investigation by the service and the defendant/applicant did not only evade the service of the letter, but declined to honour the invitation.
“Concerned by the response of the defendant/applicant, the service (DSS) communicated same to his counsel, J. B. Daudu (SAN), wherein he requested that the said letter be forwarded to him, which the service graciously did.
“Instead of honouring the invitation, the counsel to the defendant/applicant, J. B. Daudu (SAN) forwarded a four-page letter to the service. Contrary to the speculations in exhibits C1 and C2 of affidavit in support of the application of the defendant/applicant, the DSS is merely performing its statutory functions.
No comments:
Post a Comment