The National Intelligence Agency (NIA) has dismissed the claim by a former Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Kanu Agabi (SAN), that it was making efforts to arrest its former Acting Director-General, Mohammed Dauda.
The organisation in a letter by its lawyer, Wale Adesokan (SAN), obtained on Saturday, said as a law-abiding agency that believed in the sanctity of the rule of law, it would not subscribe to arbitrariness, as alleged by Agabi in his letter dated January 11 2022.
Dauda was dismissed on March 6, 2018, as the Acting Director-General of the NIA, a decision he challenged and won before the National Industrial Court in Abuja.
The NIC in a judgment delivered on October 15, 2020, by Justice Olufunke Anuwe, nullified the dismissal, ordered his reinstatement and payment of his salary and allowances.
The NIA subsequently appealed the judgment and an earlier ruling at the Court of Appeal in Abuja.
But in the January 11 letter to the Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Abubakar Malami, Agabi claimed that despite the pending appeals, the NIA was allegedly working “to compromise the personal liberty of our client on account of these appeals and or matters connected thereto”.
However, the NIA in the February 4, 2022 letter by Adesokan, responding to Agabi’s letter, argued among others, that the ex-AGF painted a false impression about the actual state of affairs in his correspondence to the AGF.
He said, “It is pertinent to note that the NIC judgement did not discharge your client from the misconduct that resulted in his dismissal. In fact, your client did not challenge or deny his misconduct.
“The NIC judgement, which is currently on appeal, was on the narrow issue of the competence of the Disciplinary Committee that dealt with your client’s misconduct.
“We state categorically that our client is a law-abiding institution which places a high premium on the rule of law.
“It is uncharitable to suggest allege or accuse our client of taking actions capable of subverting the course of justice or undermining the judgement of a court of competent jurisdiction.
“In clear and unequivocal terms, we state that it is incorrect that our client is making attempts aimed at compromising the personal liberty of your client ‘on account of the pending appeals or matters connected thereto’ as you have alleged in your letter under reference and for which you have failed to provide any concrete proof.
“Our client is very much aware and alive to its mandate as provided under the law establishing it. Our client, at all times, acts within the confines of its mandate in discharging its primary statutory responsibility infidelity with the provisions of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria as well as the law creating it.
“It is particularly important to emphasise that if at any time, any person or entity engages in any act constituting a threat to Nigeria’s national interest, our client will not shy away from its statutory responsibility. It is trite law that a statutory body is obliged to perform its statutory function at all times.
“Finally, it is unthinkable that our clients who are the appellants in the pending appeals will be the ones taking steps or doing any act calculated at undermining or compromising their own appeals.”
The Punch
