Former President Goodluck Jonathan has sought an order directing Olisah Metuh to deposit a sum of N1bn to cover travelling expenses for himself and his security personnel from his home town in Bayelsa State, to Abuja.
Justice Abang Okon, following several applications by Olisa Metuh, had ordered Jonathan to testify in defence of the former National Publicity Secretary of the Peoples Democratic Party, PDP.
However, an affidavit filed by Jonathan in support of his order read in part, “That he (Jonathan ) as the then President of the Federal Republic (2010 – 2015 ), appointed ministers and different persons to carry out the day-to-day running of the government activities and such appointees are those who directly related with the President and not third parties, such as the 2 nd respondent.
“That it is such appointees that can explain daily government’s transactions which they directly supervised and not the President who was the overall boss.
“That the 2nd respondent, Olisa Metuh, was never at any time a personal aide or appointee of the applicant.
“That he (Jonathan ) knows nothing about the seven charges for which the 1 st defendant/ 2 nd respondent is standing trial before this court and has absolutely nothing to testify about before this court.
“ The he, as a former President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, in the event that this honourable court refuses prayer one on the motion paper, shall require the sum of N1,000,000,000.00 (one billion naira) only, to cover travelling expenses for himself and his security personnel, from his home town Otuoke, in Bayelsa State, to Abuja, and also for logistics, and provision of tight security to cover any period of time that he might spend appearing before this court as President of Nigeria between 2010 and 2015.
“That Chief Mike Ozekhome, SAN, OFR, the lead counsel in this matter, informed me under the same circumstances stated in paragraph 4 above, and I verily believe him, that by virtue of the provisions of section 241(2 ) of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act, 2015, the applicant is not bound to attend to court except the 2 nd respondent herein (Olisa Metuh), who applied for the issuance of subpoena ad testificandum on him, pays for his travelling expenses.”
Among the grounds of the motion filed on Monday by Chief Mike Ozekhome, SAN, on behalf of Jonathan was that the evidence sought to be obtained from Jonathan would amount to an invasion of his privacy, and family life as provided for in Section 37 of the Constitution.
Jonathan also argued that the evidence sought to be obtained from him was likely to expose him to a criminal charge, penalty or forfeiture.
He argued that the subpoena was vague and obtained on a bad faith as it was meant to embarrass him.
According to Jonathan, Metuh was not his personal aide or an appointee and so could not have dealt with him (Jonathan ) directly under any circumstance to warrant the invitation of the applicant to testify in the charge.
The former President said he knew nothing about the charges preferred against Metuh.