A Federal Capital Territory High Court has dismissed an application brought before it by former National Security Adviser (NSA), Sambo Dasuki.
Dasuki’s lawyers promised to appeal the judgement since it would prevent them from having access to him.
The ex NSA had earlier alleged that President Muhammadu Buhari was behind his unlawful arrest and detention without trial since December 29, 2015.
In the application, Dasuki had sought an order of the court prohibiting the Federal Government and any of its agencies from further prosecuting him until the order admitting him to bail is obeyed so that he could have access to his lawyers.
His application was on the ground that the charge against him cannot lawfully be prosecuted by a government that is in brazen disobedience of a lawful court order.
Alternatively, Dasuki prayed the court for an order staying further proceedings in the charge until he has exhausted the remedies available to him in law for the enforcement of his right to liberty as
preserved by the bail order granted him.
In his ruling, Justice Peter Affen relying on Section 221and 396 (2) of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA), said that it is of common knowledge that Dasuki was rearrested upon perfecting his bail condition.
Justice Affen who praised what he described as the “gallant efforts” of the counsels to the defendant, however said his earlier order prohibiting the EFCC from rearresting Dasuki did not constitute immunity from “further prosecution.”
Justice Affen ruled that since it was clear that the ex-NSA was not re-arrested by the EFCC but by the Department of State Service, the EFCC could not be said to have violated the said order granting him bail.
The judge ruled that though the EFCC and the DSS were both federal agencies, the wrongdoing of one could not be blamed on other.
The Judge added that the order granting him bail did not preclude him from being re-arrested by other agencies of the Federal Government in respect of other alleged crime.
Reacting to the ruling, counsel to Dasuki, Ahmed Raji SAN, said there is a “high possibility” of appealing the judgment, saying if justice must be served, then counsels must be allowed unfettered access to their clients.
The court subsequently adjourned further hearing on the substantive suit to April 20 and 22.