The Federal High Court in Abuja yesterday heard how the leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Nnamdi Kanu, admitted operating an illegal radio station and inciting the public to attack police officers.
An official of the Department of State Services (DSS) said this while testifying as the second prosecution witness (PW2) in Kanu’s terrorism trial before Justice James Omotosho.
The witness, identified with the acronym BBB, testified behind a screen. He said Kanu confirmed his activities in his statement.
Led in evidence by prosecuting lawyer, Adegboyega Awomolo (SAN), BBB said, besides being IPOB leader, Kanu is the founder of the Eastern Security Network (ESN), the armed wing of IPOB.
The witness said Kanu also operated an illegal radio station, which broadcast on frequencies 102.1 FM and 88.0 FM.
He said the radio was illegal because it was not licensed by the National Broadcasting Commission (NBC).
BBB said he was directed in July 2021 to take Kanu’s statement following a letter from the Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF) requesting that the IPOB leader be investigated for terrorism activities.
The witness said he carried out the assignment in the company of four colleagues.
He said he handed Kanu the letter from the AGF, which the defendant read and also gave his lawyers to read, following which he requested that Kanu respond to the issues raised in the letter.
He said that after reading the letter, Kanu volunteered to make a statement in the presence of two of his lawyers, including Alloy Ejimakor.
Read Also: UK to restrict visa applications from Nigeria, Pakistan, others
The witness said he played some of the broadcast made by the defendant on his radio station (Radio Biafra), including where he called for the attack on police officers and other inciting comments.
BBB said Kanu admitted to making the broadcast.
On what Kanu was agitating about, the witness said Kanu wanted the secession of the five Southeast states, part of Kogi and part of Benue states from Nigeria.
The witness said the defendant’s statement-taking session was recorded on video.
At that point, Awomolo showed the witness a copy of a disc, which BBB identified as containing the recording of his interaction with Kanu.
Awomolo then applied to tender the letter from the AGF, the disc and a certificate of compliance.
But, lead defence counsel Kanu Agabi (SAN), objected, arguing that his team was not served with the AGF’s letter and the video recording.
Agabi said it was part of the right of the defendant to be given copies of all documents and materials that the prosecution planned to rely on in prosecuting the case.
Awomolo said he was ready to furnish the defendant with all the necessary documents and materials that the prosecution wishes to rely on.
Ruling, Justice James Omotosho held that the defence was entitled to all the documents and materials the prosecution planned to rely on.
The judge ordered the prosecution to, in line with the provision of Section 36 of the Constitution, serve on the defendant all facilities, including documents that it intends to rely on to prosecute the case.
Justice Omotosho adjourned till May 7 to enable the prosecution to serve the defence with all the necessary documents and for PW2 to continue his testimony.
Earlier, the PW1, identified as PWAAA, concluded his testimony after being cross-examined by Agabi and re-examined by Awomolo.
Under cross-examination, the witness said he was not aware that the defendant was charged with 15 counts, but that he was aware that Kanu was charged with inciting others to attack members of the police force.
PWAAA said: “I was not part of the drafting of the charge, but I am aware that he (the defendant) incited people to kill members of the police force.”
The witness said he was not aware that the count relating to that allegation was struck out from the charge in an earlier ruling, and that eight out of the 15 counts contained in the original charge were struck out by the court in an earlier ruling.
Justice Omotosho barred the sister-in-law of the defendant, Mrs. Favour Kanu, from the next three sittings.
He said the decision was informed by the conduct of the lady, who admitted to live-broadcasting proceedings on social media.
Before the judge issued the order, he sought to know who Favour was.
The fair-complexioned lady, dressed in black and sitting beside her husband, rose to her feet and identified herself.
The judge then ordered her to step forward to the front of the courtroom, which she did.
Justice Omotosho said he would have cited her for contempt in the face of the court for recording the court’s sitting and broadcasting it.
Favour said she was streaming live, but did not know that the judge was still sitting.
She apologised and promised not to do it again.
Agabi pleaded with the judge not to sanction the woman, but Justice Omotosho insisted that the lady must vacate the courtroom, which she promptly did.