Former Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) spokesman, Olisa Metuh is now on admission at the Lagos University Hospital (LUTH), Lagos two weeks after he left the National Hospital, Abuja where he was once on bed rest.
His lawyer, Emeka Etiaba (SAN) disclosed this Friday at the resumption of proceedings in Metuh’s trial before Justice Okon Abang of the Federal High Court, Abuja.
Etiaba, who tendered a letter dated June 8, 2016 to support his position, said Metuh opted for LUTH after following his failure to secure the court’s nod to seek medical care abroad as was recommended by the National Hospital.
The letter from LUTH, signed for Consultant Neurosurgeon by Dr. Olufemi Bankole, said Metuh was under observation and management by the hospital and would need to be confined to bed rest for some time. The letter was silent on the duration of Metuh’s admission.
Metuh last attended proceedings on May 23 when his 4th witness, Anthony Okeke commenced giving evidence. He was to continue the following day, only for Etiaba to inform the court that his client was on admission at the National Hospital and was on bed rest.
Although Justice Abang noted that the duration of his treatment was not indicated in a medical report issued by one Dr. O. O. Oyeleye, a Consultant Neurosurgeon at the National Hospital, Abuja, which Metuh submitted to support his request for adjournment, the judge adjourned to May 30.
Friday, Metuh was expected to resume his defence, but his lawyer to the court he was absent and was on admission in another hospital – LUTH.
He tendered the letter from LUTH to support his claim, and urged the court to adjourn proceedings to a later date.
Prosecution lawyer, Sylvanus Tahir queried the procedure adopted by Metuh, who relocated from one hospital to another without the knowledge of the court.
“The last time we were here, this court was informed of the admission of the 1st defendant (Metuh) at the National Hospital, Abuja. I urged the court to take judicial notice of the fact that the 1st defendant is deemed to be on admission at the National Hospital.
“If there is any case of referral for further evaluation of the 1st defendant, I would have thought that the hospital should have availed this court, out of courtesy, with a referral letter, showing the sequence of event, since the National Hospital earlier wrote this court about the admission of the 1st defendant.
“The instant letter seems to be coming from LUTH. That creates doubt in my mind as to whether the information contained in it is reliable. The letter also did not show as to when exactly the 1st defendant shall be discharged for him to return for his trial, because the letter said he is under observation and management for the next few weeks.
“The court has no idea when the 1st defendant was discharged by the National Hospital. One would have expected that the 1st defendant would have availed himself the opportunity of attending to his health between the last time we were here and now. The same issue of health came up when last we were here.
“The letter is dated June 8. It is curious that on the eve of the resumption of the court’s business, another letter is written. The court being human being, like us, who are all mortals, we expect a demonstration of good faith such that will not give room for doubt. We most reluctantly concede to adjournment,” Tahir said.
Responding, Etiaba denied the impression that his client was playing pranks. He explained that Metuh was actually ill and needed medical attention.
Etiaba said his client could not procure a referral note from the National Hospital management, who he said claimed that their facility, being the best in the country could no reverse itself by referring Metuh to inferior Nigerian hospitals having earlier referred him for treatment abroad.
“This trial will come and go, and God willing, we will all be alive to continue to work from the Bar. It is not a matter of life and death.
“The board of the National Hospital clearly took a position that it is the number one hospital in Nigeria and that they cannot reverse themselves and refer a matter, on which they had written that the 1st defendant be referred to London, to a lower hospital in Nigeria.
“So the hospital declined to issue a referral letter referring the 1st defendant to LUTH or any hospital in Nigeria. For this reason, the 1st defendant had to commence afresh the procedure that he has been put through in the hospital.
“The fact of what the 1st defendant went through in the National Hospital was reduced to an affidavit, but because he was restricted to the hospital, he could not approach the court to swear to it. It was that reason he approached LUTH for the letter. The letter is not from the blues, it is from LUTH.
“In all we do in this matter, we are not oblivious of the fact that the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) has the competence to investigate all the documents presented. We invite the EFCC to investigate the letter if it (EFCC) suspected it (the letter) is not what it says it is.
“On the letter not being specific on the time, said no medical personnel can be specific on medical issues, particularly this time of issue. What the author did was to give an indication as to the duration, which is what I expect a knowledgeable doctor should do.
“This application is brought in good faith. What we see in Nigeria today, demonstrates the fact that human health is unpredictable and life itself has also become unpredictable. The first defendant is in dare need of medical help. That is why he is not in court this morning,” Etiaba said.
He urged the court to grant an adjournment to cover the period highlighted in the letter to allow the 1st defendant return and continue with his defence.