In March 2016, the Federal Government challenged the powers of the Court of Justice for the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS), through its lawyer, T.A Gazalli, to compel it to release the former National Security Adviser (NSA), Col. Sambo Dasuki from detention, stating that the detention was not in disobedience of any legal pronouncement.
Dasuki was earlier arrested in November 2015 and released from Kuje Prison in Abuja, after perfecting all bail conditions. In the following month, he was rearrested by operatives of the Department of State Security (DSS) without trial.
None of the court order to release Dasuki on bail was obeyed by the Federal Government.
In October 2016, ECOWAS under Justice Friday Chijioke Nwoke, ordered the FG to release Col. Sambo Dasuki from detention and pay him N15m damages for deprivation of his right, under Article 5 and 6 of the African Charter on Peoples’ and Persons’ Rights to Freedom of Liberty.
The Federal Government argued that the ECOWAS court lacked the authority to enforce bail conditions granted to Dasuki, as it could not exercise appellate jurisdiction over Nigerian Courts.
However, the Nigerian Government failed to release Dasuki. He was detained by the Federal Government because he was accused of constituting a threat to national security and was involved in a $2.1bn arms fund scam.
The Government claimed Dasuki being a crown prince of the Sokoto Caliphate, had large sympathizers across the country, who might jeopardize his trial if he was released on bail.
In October 2017, the Supreme Court adjourned his case to January 2018. The cases against him are on money laundering, mismanagement of funds, illegal possession of arms, amongst others
Meanwhile the DSS has produced Dasuki to testify in the on-going trial of the former National Publicity Secretary of the Peoples’ Democratic Party, Olisa Metuh. The court dismissed Dasuki’s application to decline the subpoena earlier issued to him and ordered him to enter the witness box.
Dasuki had earlier asked the court to decline the subpoena issued against him stating that he was already labelled as an accomplice to the defendant and his current state of mind was in turmoil.
