Connect with us

News

Alleged terrorism: I’ve no case to answer, let me go — Nnamdi Kanu

Published

on

For the fourth time, detained leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra, IPoB, Nnamdi Kanu, yesterday, failed to open his defence to the seven-count terrorism charge the Federal Government preferred against him.

At the resumed proceedings, Kanu, who is conducting his case by himself, after he disengaged his team of lawyers, insisted he has no case to answer.

He maintained that in the absence of a valid charge pending before the court, there was no legal basis for him to either open his defence or to file and exchange a final written address with FG.

Rather, he urged the judge to take judicial notice of the motion he filed along with a supporting affidavit, which challenged the jurisdiction of the court to continue to try him over an offence he said is unknown to any extant law.

Kanu asked the court to order his immediate release from the custody of the Department of State Services, DSS, where he has been detained since 2021.

“You cannot ask me to begin my defence when you have not stated the law under which I am being charged. The records of this court show there is no law backing these charges. I request to be released. My Lord, please take judicial notice of all the records before this court,” he added.

Citing section 36(12) of the 1999 Constitution, as amended, Kanu contended that there was no law to back the charge against him, even as he accused the court of violating a Supreme Court judgment he said condemned his extraordinary rendition from Kenya by the FG.

See also  PICTURES - Many feared trapped as three-storey building collapses in Anambra

When he was reminded that the apex court remitted his case for a fresh trial, Kanu stood his ground that trying him over a non-existent crime amounted to a denial of his constititional rights.

“In Nigeria today, the Constitution is the Supreme law; there is no provision for terrorism offence in the Constitution. There is no valid charge against me. I will not go back to any detention today.

“Terrorism Prevention and Prohibition Act has been repealed. I cannot put in defense under a repealed law. I won’t do that,” Kanu fumed from the dock.

Continuing, he said, “Tell any lawyer to show me the valid charge. I appeal to you to please take judicial notice of the repeal of the terrorism charges. I am not ready to go back to detention today unless I am shown the valid charge against me.

“I cannot be tried under a law that has been repealed. A law that is not written in our Constitution. Prosecuting me under a repealed law is a violation of my fundamental right,” he added.

In his response, the prosecution counsel, Chief Adegboyega Awomolo, SAN, queried the competence of the documents Kanu served on him, insisting they lacked probative value and should be discounted by the court.

FG’s lawyer prayed the court not to further indulge the defendant, who he said was merely wasting valuable judicial time.

He urged the court to deem the documents that Kanu recently filed as his final written address and to order parties to adopt the processes to enable judgment to be delivered in the matter.

In a short ruling, trial Justice James Omotosho dismissed FG’s contention that the processes Kanu filed were not competent.

See also  Airlines reject fresh $11.50 NIS fee

Justice Omotosho said the court would take them into consideration in its judgment.

Besides, the court said it took notice of the fact that the defendant is not a lawyer and decided to give him a further opportunity to consult a legal practitioner for further guidance.

Justice Omotosho hinted that the court would foreclose Kanu’s right should he fail to defend the charge within the period allotted for him to do so.

He subsequently adjourned further proceeding till Wednesday for the defendant to either enter his defence or have his right to do so waived.

It will be recalled that the court had, on October 24, ordered the IPOB leader to open his defence to the charge against him.

However, Kanu, who earlier named several individuals that included serving Governors, Ministers, ex-Governors, and Security Chiefs, among the 23 persons he intended to produce as his witnesses, later made a volte face and shelved his plan to defend the charge.

Kanu had initially prayed that the court grant him a 90-day period for the witnesses he described as vital to testify in the matter.

Among his earlier proposed witnesses were the Governor of Imo state, Hope Uzodimma; that of Lagos state, Babajide Sanwo-Olu; Minister of the Federal Capital Territory, FCT, Nyesom Wike; the immediate past Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Abubakar Malami; as well as a former Chief of Army Staff, Gen. Tukur Buratai (rtd).

Others were the Minister of Works, Dave Umahi; the immediate past Governor of Abia State, Okezie Ikpeazu; a former Minister of Defence, Gen. Theophilus Danjuma (rtd); the immediate past Director-General of the National Intelligence Agency, NIA, Ahmed Rufai Abubakar; as well as the former Director-General of the Department of State Services, DSS, Yusuf Bichi.

See also  Greece set to approve controversial 13-hour workday reform

In the motion dated October 21 and marked: FHC/ABJ/CR/383/2015, Kanu equally hinted that he would call other persons whose names were not on the list he submitted.

On the day he was to open his defence, though the court reserved seats for the “summoned witnesses,” Kanu backtracked.

The court had earlier rejected a no-case-submission he filed to be discharged and acquitted.
It dismissed the defendant’s position that the totality of evidence the prosecution tendered in the matter failed to establish a prima-facie case against him.

Kanu argued that the five witnesses FG brought to testify before the court failed to prove his culpability.

FG had, among other things, accused him of leading a separatist movement that called for the secession of the South-Eastern part of the country.

He was further accused of inciting violence and killings through broadcasts that were heard in various parts of the country.

Kanu had since pleaded his innocence to the charge.

FOLLOW US ON:

FACEBOOK

TWITTER

PINTEREST

TIKTOK

YOUTUBE

LINKEDIN

TUMBLR

INSTAGRAM

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

News

Sultan backs Sharia law in Oyo, Ekiti

Published

on

President-General, Nigeria Supreme Council of Islamic Affairs (NSCIA) and Sultan of Sokoto, Muhammad Sa’ad Abubakar III, has expressed support for the establishment of an Independent Shariah Arbitration Panel in Ekiti and Oyo states.

But the Aare Ona Kakanfo of Yorubaland, Gani Adams, condemned the attempt to introduce Sharia in the South West, saying it is alien to Yoruba culture and religious beliefs.

The 20th Sultan of Sokoto and the spiritual leader of Nigeria’s Muslims also expressed concern about the spate of intolerance and disregard for the rights of Muslims, especially in the southern part of the country. He noted that Muslims in the South West had been denied their constitutional rights to a Shariah Court of Appeal.

In a statement, yesterday, by the Deputy National Legal Adviser of NSCIA, Haroun Eze, the traditional ruler lamented the unwarranted resistance and objections from political and traditional quarters to the Muslim community’s efforts to establish an Independent Shariah Arbitration Panel in Ekiti.

He said this was coming barely a few weeks after the announcement on the inauguration of a Shariah panel in Oyo generated “unnecessary anxiety, thereby leading to its indefinite postponement.

“The Independent Arbitration Panel, which is a voluntary platform designed solely for the resolution of civil and marital disputes among consenting Muslims, was to fill the inexplicable vacuum created by the failure of the political elite in the South West to establish Sharia courts, as allowed by the Nigerian Constitution, in South West, despite the huge population of Muslims in the region,” Sultan said.

See also  FG tightens border control due to fresh Ebola Outbreak

According to the monarch, such scenarios as the denial of the rights of female students to wear the Hijab despite a Supreme Court judgment, are nothing but calculated attempts to prevent Muslims in the region from practising their faith.

Speaking during the 2025 Oodua festival at Enuwa Square, Ile-Ife, Osun State, yesterday, Adams stressed that the introduction of Sharia was to destabilise the Yoruba land by religious fanatics and fundamentalists. He emphasised that while Saudi Arabia is an Islamic kingdom where Sharia aligns with religious teachings and is widely accepted, Nigeria remains a nation where the constitution guarantees freedom of religion.

According to him, Saudi Arabia is a good example of an Islamic kingdom that practises Sharia law according to the Holy Quran. He said: “The Saudis also adhere strictly to the law, and they are happy because Sharia law is in tandem with their religious beliefs and teachings. But Nigeria is a secular nation where the constitution allows every citizen to practise whatever religion they believe in freely without any intimidation.

“Sharia law is alien to our culture and religious beliefs in Yoruba land; therefore, those religious fanatics masquerading as Muslims should stay away from acts that could set Yorubaland on fire.”

Meanwhile, berating the recent influx of Islamic State’s West Africa Province (ISWAP) in the South West, Adams called on the federal and state government to intensify efforts to tackle insecurity in the region. Adams further expressed the readiness of the Oodua People’s Congress (OPC) to partner other security groups in curbing the scourge in Yoruba land.

See also  Cleric warns against foreign manipulation, says insecurity not religious war

FOLLOW US ON:

FACEBOOK

TWITTER

PINTEREST

TIKTOK

YOUTUBE

LINKEDIN

TUMBLR

INSTAGRAM

Continue Reading

News

Statement on the Rejection of Sharia Law in South-West Nigeria

Published

on

The Sultan of Sokoto and the leadership of the Nigerian Supreme Council for Islamic Affairs (NSCIA) must clearly understand this position: the Yoruba people of South-West Nigeria do not need, want, or accept Sharia law as a governing system in their land.

Yoruba society is uniquely pluralistic. In most families across the South-West, Christians, Muslims, and traditional worshippers coexist peacefully under the same roof. This interwoven family structure is one of our greatest strengths. Introducing Sharia law into such a setting would place families on a collision course, fracture long-standing relationships, and undermine the shared values that have sustained our people for generations.

It is important to ask a fundamental question: Is it compulsory or by force that Muslims must live under Sharia law? Many Muslims across the world practice their faith peacefully without imposing religious law on diverse societies. Faith should be a personal conviction, not a political weapon.

Any attempt—direct or indirect—to Islamise the South-West against the will of its people will be firmly resisted through lawful and collective means, because the Yoruba are not a monolithic religious bloc. Our philosophies, cultures, and worldviews are distinct. We cherish family unity, tolerance, and mutual respect above religious extremism.

Let it be clearly stated: the Yoruba are not religious bigots, nor are we extremists. We are a civilized people who value progress, coexistence, and peace. We reject anything that may plunge our land into chaos, division, or bloodshed. Therefore, those advocating Sharia governance should restrict such ambitions to regions where it is openly accepted. The people of the South-West are not interested.

See also  Big diplomatic overhaul: Tinubu’s 65 envoy picks brace for Senate storm

Nigeria is constitutionally a secular state, and the implementation of Sharia law as a state system directly contradicts the principles of secularism, equal citizenship, and fundamental human rights. If Nigeria intends to remain united, no religious legal system should be imposed on unwilling populations.

Furthermore, the practical outcomes of Sharia implementation in parts of Northern Nigeria raise serious concerns. These include:

Persistent insecurity and terrorism

Banditry and mass kidnapping

Ethnic and religious tensions

Widespread poverty and hunger

High levels of illiteracy

Deep social inequality and segregation

These realities cannot be ignored, and they offer no justification for exporting such a system to the South-West.

To our Muslim brothers and sisters in the OduduwaYorubaterritory: peaceful coexistence is our collective responsibility. We must not allow the mistakes and crises of other regions to destabilize our homeland. The Yoruba way has always been dialogue, tolerance, and mutual respect—and we intend to preserve it.

Leave the Oduduwa Yoruba land as it is. Let us live in peace.

Ire oooo.

Signed
Comrade Oyegunle Oluwamayowa Omotoyole (Omayor)
Oduduwa Nation Home-Based Youth Leader.

FOLLOW US ON:

FACEBOOK

TWITTER

PINTEREST

TIKTOK

YOUTUBE

LINKEDIN

TUMBLR

INSTAGRAM

Continue Reading

News

Sultan-Led NSCIA Slams Southern Resistance To Sharia Panels Establishment

Published

on

The Nigerian Supreme Council for Islamic Affairs (NSCIA) under the leadership of its President-General and Sultan of Sokoto, His Eminence, Alh. Muhammad Sa’ad Abubakar, has expressed concern over alleged intolerance and disregard for the rights of Muslims, especially in the southern part of the country.

A statement signed by NSCIA deputy national legal adviser, Imam Haron Muhammed Eze, on Wednesday, said the most recent of this development emanated from Ekiti state where the efforts of the Muslim community to set up an Independent Sharia (Arbitration) panel was met with resistance and objections from both political and traditional quarters.

It added that this came a few weeks after the announcement of the inauguration of a Sharia panel in Oyo state generated anxiety and led to its indefinite postponement.

The Independent Sharia Panel is a voluntary platform designed solely for resolution of civil and marital disputes among consenting Muslims.

According to the statement, the Arbitration and the Sharia Court of Appeal, just like the Customary Court of Appeal are provided in section 275 of the 1999 constitution (as amended) of the Republic of Nigeria confirming the legality of both initiatives.

It added that the NSCIA strongly supported the establishment of the Independent Sharia Arbitration Panel in Ekiti and Oyo States for the intended purpose, especially where the Muslims in the states have been denied their constitutional right to a Sharia Court of Appeal in all the states of South-West Nigeria.

The group, while disapproving of the Supreme Court judgement, said their judgements are nothing but calculated attempts to prevent Muslim in the region from practicing their faith.

See also  US seizes Russian‑Flagged Oil Tanker linked to Venezuela

The NSCIA stressed that the council cannot find any legal justification for the resistance. It called on governors and traditional authorities in the southern part of the country, particularly the South-West, to ensure that the constitutional rights of Muslims in their respective domains are preserved and protected.

FOLLOW US ON:

FACEBOOK

TWITTER

PINTEREST

TIKTOK

YOUTUBE

LINKEDIN

TUMBLR

INSTAGRAM

Continue Reading

Trending