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.

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“Terrorism Prevention and Prohibition Act has been repealed. I cannot put in defense under a repealed law.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“I cannot be tried under a law that has been repealed.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 Prosecuting me under a repealed law is a violation of my fundamental right,” he added.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.

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.

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