However, the NIA, through its Head of Legal Department, A. Wakili, claimed that Dauda was never a substantive DG and only acted in that capacity. The agency argued that the court's decision focused on procedural matters while the case regarding alleged infractions against Dauda was still ongoing.
In his rebuttal, Dauda clarified that he had no influence over the news reporting, as he was out of the country when the initial reports emerged. He emphasised that there were no outstanding issues pending adjudication, as far as the Federal Court of Appeal was concerned. Dauda stated firmly that the appellate court's ruling was final, denying the NIA the opportunity to manipulate or delay the case any further.
He expressed his commitment to upholding national security and refuted any claims that he had written or orchestrated petitions or press statements compromising the country's interests. Dauda also highlighted that his tenure as Acting DG of the NIA had ended almost six years ago, and since then, he had not had access to any agency documents or correspondence.
Furthermore, Dauda shed light on the circumstances surrounding his appointment and the contentious relationship he had with influential individuals in the government. He attributed his removal to his refusal to allocate public funds for personal purposes, which led to his replacement by the secretary of the committee seeking to exploit those funds.
Dauda believed that his continued tenure as the NIA DG posed a threat to certain self-serving agendas. Despite the challenges he faced, Dauda affirmed his unwavering loyalty to Nigeria and its people, emphasising that governments may come and go, but the country remains.
The former NIA DG's response serves to counter the agency's denial and assert the legitimacy of his reinstatement as affirmed by the Court of Appeal. As the legal proceedings unfold, it remains to be seen how this dispute will be resolved and what implications it may have for the NIA and national security matters.