The Nation Newspaper

Tag: Nnamdi Kanu

  • BREAKING: Judge threatens to adjourn Kanu’s trial indefinitely

    BREAKING: Judge threatens to adjourn Kanu’s trial indefinitely

    Justice Binta Nyako of the Federal High Court in Abuja has threatened to adjourn indefinitely the trial of the leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) Nnamdi Kanu should he insist on further delaying the commencement of the trial.

    Earlier today, Kanu’s lawyer, Aloy Ejimakor had stated some conditions to be met by the court for his client to submit to trial.

    Some of the conditions were that the bail earlier granted him should be restored; he should be relocated from the custody of the Department of State Services (DSS) and he should be allowed free access to his lawyers to enable him to prepare for his trial.

    Read Also: Ensure unconditional release of Nnamdi Kanu, Abia Rep begs Tinubu

    The prosecuting lawyer, Adegboyega Awomolo (SAN) objected to Ejimakor’s requests, describing them as frivolous vexatious irritating, and unmeritorious.

    Justice Nyako fixed the ruling on the requests by Kanu’s lawyer for May 20 but insisted that progress must be made in the case on Wednesday by allowing the prosecution to open its case by calling witnesses.

    The judge said: “It is either we open this trial today by prosecution calling witnesses or I adjourn this matter indefinitely till the time you are ready for trial.

    “You cannot continue to hold the court to ransom. I hope you know the consequences of adjourning the trial sine die. You have to make a choice and the choice has to be for you.

    “I will rise for some minutes for you to think about this and make a choice and that choice has to be made today”, Justice Nyako said shortly before standing down proceedings.

    Kanu, members of his legal team, and some relatives in court are currently meeting on what option to take.

    Details shortly…

  • We are open to political solution on Nnamdi Kanu – Lawyers

    We are open to political solution on Nnamdi Kanu – Lawyers

    The team of lawyers representing the detained leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra, (IPOB) Nnamdi Kanu said they would not oppose political solution to resolve the protracted case between the Federal Government and their client.

    The lawyers, led by Kanu’s special counsel, Mr. Alloy Ejimakor, said that section 17 of the Federal High Court Act, empowered the trial judge to recommend reconciliation, otherwise referred to as a “political solution” for the resolution of such matters.

    “The provision of that section is not limited to civil matters alone. So, anyone that puts the issue on the table, will consider it. A political solution makes better sense than prosecution.

    “However, it is for the government to put it on the table, then we will consider it. Having said that, we first must defend him and not play politics. Right now, what is on our table is to fight for his defence.

    “If they bring that option to the table and our client gives us the instruction, we will go for it,” Ejimakor told newsmen.

    Read Also: Nnamdi Kanu appeals against trial court’s ruling

    Citing cases of the freed Yoruba nation agitator, Sunday Adeyemo, popularly known as Sunday Igboho and social rights activist, Omoyele Sowore, Kanu’s lawyer said he was hopeful that the President Bola Tinubu-led administration would adopt a new approach to handle the matter, different from what was done by his predecessor.

    “We urge President Tinubu to carefully review this case which he inherited from the past administration and see if it was not politically motivated.

    “Our client did not deserve the travail and tribulations he has been forced to endure. Sometimes, we do wonder what made his case unique. People wonder if it is because of where he hails from that made his case different,” Kanu’s counsel added.

    Besides, Ejimakor berated the prosecution for not granting the embattled IPOB leader the facility to adequately prepare his defence to the charge.

    He alleged that the Department of State Services (DSS) has continued to either deny the defendant access to his lawyers or to monitor his private conversations.

  • DSS interfering in my defence preparation, Kanu tells court

    DSS interfering in my defence preparation, Kanu tells court

    The family of detained Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) leader Nnamdi Kanu has accused the Department of State Services (DSS) of eavesdropping on his confidential conversations with his lawyers while preparing his defence.

    Also, his younger brother, Emmanuel, in an open letter to the five Southeast governors, described Kanu’s detention as unlawful.

    “Kanu is gravely ill and dying slowly. Biafraland will hold you all accountable should anything happen to him,” he wrote.

    The younger Kanu urged the governors not to abandon their son in detention.

    He said Kanu has been “wrongfully held against his will and his fundamental human rights have been violated”.

    Kanu’s legal team appealed the March 19 ruling of Justice Binta Nyako of the Abuja Federal High Court.

    They accused the DSS of obstructing Kanu’s right to prepare his defence.

    Read Also: FULL LIST: Jail term, fine, other consequences for mutilation, abuse of naira notes

    “The respondent (DSS) denied counsel to the appellant the right to take notes, denied them the rights to transmit messages and information to the appellant, secretly took pictures of counsel and the appellant’s interviews, recorded briefings between the appellant’s lawyers and the appellant, scanned documents meant for the appellant from the appellant’s team of lawyers and even refused to allow lawyers to the appellant deliver letters to the appellant.

    “The action of the respondent in the instant case is a flagrant violation of the appellant’s right to counsel of his own choice as stipulated in Section 36 (6) (c) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended),” Kanu’s lawyers said.

    According to them, these issues were brought before Justice Nyako, who ruled that she could not “make orders directing a security agency on how to do their work”.

    Lead Counsel, Aloy Ejimakor, informed the Court of Appeal that the lower court erred when it denied Kanu’s constitutional right to a fair trial.

    He claimed the DSS failed to provide adequate “facilities to prepare for the defence of the criminal allegations against the appellant and his right to counsel of his own choice, thereby occasioning a grave miscarriage of justice”.

    He added: “The learned trial court erred in law when the court assumed jurisdiction to proceed with the hearing of the criminal trial against the appellant when the appellant is glaringly denied the constitutional right to a fair trial with particular reference to the denial of adequate facilities to prepare for the defence of the criminal allegations against the appellant and his right to counsel of his own choice, thereby occasioning a grave miscarriage of justice.

    “Fair hearing/trial bears the constitutional safeguards of ensuring that the appellant is accorded the adequate facilities to prepare for the defence of the criminal allegations levelled against the appellant.

    “The denial of the appellant the opportunity to interact and brief his counsel on what line of defences the appellant tends to agitate in the trial court and rely on was adequately brought to the attention of the trial court by motion.

    “The trial court failed and neglected to make necessary orders that would protect the appellant’s aforesaid rights but rather held that the Court cannot dictate how the respondent carries out its work.

    “The trial court has the powers to order the respondent (being the detaining authority) to cease and desist from interfering with appellant’s constitutional/fair hearing right to adequate facilities to prepare defence and his right to counsel of his choice; and where it is impossible to do so or where the Respondent persists, the trial court has the power to order an alternative custodial arrangement or non-custodial arrangement for the appellant.

    “Denial of the appellant’s right to adequate facilities to prepare defence as enshrined in Section 36 (6) (b) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 is a jurisdictional issue in the absence of which the trial court cannot assume or proceed with the jurisdiction over the case unless and until such facilities are accorded to the appellant.”

  • Nnamdi Kanu appeals against trial court’s ruling

    Nnamdi Kanu appeals against trial court’s ruling

    The detained leader of the proscribed Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Nnamdi Kanu, has appealed against the decision of a Federal High Court (FHC), Abuja dismissing his objection to his trial continuation.

    Kanu, in a notice of appeal dated and filed March 28 through his team of lawyers led by Aloy Ejimakor, prayed the Court of Appeal, Abuja to allow the appeal and set aside the trial court’s decision.

    The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that the IPOB leader had filed a preliminary objection seeking an order for some conditions to be met by the Federal Government before his trial at FHC could proceed.

    He had alleged that the Department of State Service (DSS) personnel often seized documents of his lawyers during visitation, stopped his lawyers from taking notes, eavesdropped on his consultation with his lawyers on matters pertaining to his defence, among others.

    He alleged that he had not been given adequate time and facilities to defend himself in accordance with Section 36(6)(b) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended).

    But Justice Binta Nyako of a FHC had, in a ruling on March 19, declined to grant the objection of the detained IPOB leader.

    The judge, who ordered accelerated hearing of the trial, also dismissed his application for bail.

    However, Kanu, in the notice of appeal, listed the Federal Republic of Nigeria as the sole respondent.

    He argued that the trial court erred in law when the court assumed jurisdiction to proceed with the hearing of the criminal trial against him when he was glaringly denied the constitutional right to fair trial.

    He alleged that he was denied adequate facilities to prepare for the defence of the criminal allegations against him and his right to counsel of his own choice, thereby occasioning a grave miscarriage of justice.

    Read Also: Reps Deputy Speaker lobbies Tinubu for Nnamdi Kanu’s release

    “The denial of the appellant (Kanu) the opportunity to interact and brief his counsel on what line of defences the appellant tends to agitate in the trial court and rely on was adequately brought to the attention of the trial court by motion.

    “The trial court failed and neglected to make necessary orders that would protect the appellant’s aforesaid rights but rather held that the court cannot dictate how the respondent carries out its work,” he said.

    He said the trial court had the power to order the respondent to cease and desist from interfering with his constitutional right.

    Besides, Kanu said the lower court had the power to order an alternative custodial arrangement or non-custodial arrangement for him, where it is impossible for the respondent to comply or where the respondent persists in the act.

    He said: “Denial of the appellant’s right to adequate facilities to prepare defence as enshrined in Section 36 (6) (b) of the 1999 Constitution is a jurisdictional issues in the absence of which the trial court cannot assume or proceed with the jurisdiction over the case unless and until such facilities are accorded to the appellant.”

    Kanu argued that though he had prayed the court to stop the DSS alleged unconstitutional acts of forcibly seizing and photocopying confidential legal documents brought to him by his lawyers meant for his defence of the charges against him, the court declined to grant the plea.

    He said the trial judge erred in law when the court ordered for accelerated hearing despite the consistently refusal of the respondent to afford him the right to adequate facility to prepare for his defence of the charges levelled against him and his right to counsel.

    According to him, the order for accelerated hearing of the case in face of the constitutional breaches of fair hearing/trial rights of the appellant is a credence to the respondent to proceed on the unconstitutional denial of the appellant his right to adequate facilities to prepare for his defence and his right to counsel of his choice.

    “In the present case, where Sections 36 (6) (b) and (c) of the Constitution are violated by the respondent against the appellant, the trial court lacks the jurisdiction to hear and or proceed with the hearing of the case,” he added.

    The IPOB leader, therefore, prayed the appellate court to allow the appeal, vacate the ruling of the lower court for the trial court to decline jurisdiction to proceed with the hearing of the case unless and until he is granted his right to fair hearing under Section 36(6)(6)(b) and (c) of the constitution.

    Alternatively, he urged the Appeal Court for the trial court to order an alternative custodial or non-custodial arrangement free of interference with his said constitutional right to fair hearing.

    He equally sought an order setting aside the order for accelerated hearing of the case in the circumstances of the case where he is not allowed facilities to prepare for the defence of the charges against him and denied his right to counsel. .

    Kanu sought a stay of proceedings pending when the respondent affords him the constitutional safeguards of being afforded adequate facilities to prepare for his defence and his unfettered right to counsel.(NAN)

  • The Nnamdi Kanu matter

    The Nnamdi Kanu matter

    Last week’s court appearance by Nnamdi Kanu, leader of the proscribed Indigenous People of Biafra IPOB, stood out in a very remarkable way.

    It is not that his arraignment that Tuesday did not witness the usual security cordon characteristic of previous ones. Neither did its allure lie in his being granted some of the prayers he had sought from the presiding judge. Nothing of such as all his prayers were refused.

    But that court outing struck as the first time since his extraordinary rendition from Kenya and subsequent trials he found himself addressing the press after the court session. It is not clear the arrangement that allowed him to speak to the media especially given previous posturing by security agencies on such matters.

    Whatever the circumstance that permitted that brief media interface provided Kanu the rare opportunity to put on record, his views on some of the contentious issues surrounding the festering insecurity in the southeast region. Before then, we had been treated to third party information on what Kanu was purported to have said or not said.

    At one point, his lawyers were the only source of information on Kanu’s views and standing on evolving matters. And at another, his family members allowed access to him dished out such information.

    And with all issues of this nature, instances arose where such representation led to dispute among his close allies. Kanu has now spoken first-hand and has been heard. He may not have prepared himself for the media interface. His choice of words, demeanour and constant interjections from his lawyers gave out all that.  Some of his claims may also lend themselves to misinterpretation.

    Nevertheless, he spoke clearly on why insecurity still festers in that region, the possible interests behind it and how to bring a final closure to the malfeasance. Not only was he unequivocal in distancing the IPOB from the sundry security infractions and criminalities in the region, he vowed to bring an end to them if he regains his freedom.

    “I swear anybody committing crime in the east cannot go free. They are doing this because I am in the DSS custody. If I were to be outside, nobody could try this. I suspect that some people in government are complicit. They are making money with insecurity.

    Anybody involved in any form of violence in the east in the name of IPOB is a goner and they know it. Let me come out of this mess, only two minutes there will be peace in the East”, Kanu vowed.

     He further asked: “Who is that bagger or idiot that will speak when I am speaking? That I will give an order in the East who is that idiot that I will give an order that will counter it?” This aspect of his speech could be misconstrued. But he spoke within the context of sundry groups claiming to be speaking for the IPOB and issuing directives especially on the sit-at-home order. It is unfathomable that he could be implying that no other authority can speak when he speaks.

    Irrespective of the limitations of his choice of words, Kanu did not leave anyone in doubt about the reasons for the unceasing insecurity, those benefiting from it and how to bring it to an end. And these are the issues to contend.  Much of his views struck a common chord with the position of leaders from the southeast on the insecurity in that region.

     Not only did he distance the IPOB from the criminalities in the east, he said sundry criminal groups were taking advantage of his detention to commit crimes. For him, the solution lies in his being set free. With his freedom, those who issue conflicting orders or engage in sundry criminalities on the guise of agitating for his release will have no further room to exploit.

    His claims distancing the IPOB from the criminal activities in the region may not go down well with the federal government that holds the group responsible for all security infractions in the zone. Sadly, such fixation came with dubious profiling which views anybody from that region especially the youths as potential IPOB recruits. The telling consequences of such sweeping generalisation on the lives of the innocent people are a story for another day.

    But the good thing there is that Kanu’s views are largely in sync with the position of southeast leaders and interests groups on how to resolve the insecurity in the region. In 2021, a strong Igbo delegation led by late elder statesman, Mbazulike Amechi met former president, Muhammadu Buhari and pleaded with him to free Kanu as a solution to the lingering insecurity in the area. Buhari’s reply was that it was a difficult task.

    Again, on the eve of his 94th birthday in 2022, Amechi asked Buhari to release Kanu to him as a birthday gift. “There is only one key solution to the killings in Igbo land now, and that is the release of Nnamdi Kanu. If that young man is released, you will see all these criminals…claiming to be agitating for the release of Nnamdi Kanu while their real intention is to rob unsuspecting people will go into hiding” he had pleaded with Buhari. 

    Amechi urged Buhari to release Kanu to him and hold him responsible (arrest him) if he (Kanu) misbehaves thereafter. In spite of this passionate plea, Buhari turned a deaf ear to him until the old man passed away only for the presidency to shower praises in a tribute to the late nationalist and first republic minister of aviation.

    It did not come as a surprise that some interest groups faulted Buhari for not acceding to Amechi’s request only to turn around to revel on platitudes and encomiums after his death. They felt if Buhari held him in such high esteem, he should have obliged him his 94th day birthday request to set Nnamdi Kanu free. All of that is now history.

    Amechi and his group of Igbo leaders were not alone in this position. The apex socio-cultural Igbo group, Ohaneze Ndigbo also made several representations to Buhari to explore the political option to the crisis by freeing Kanu to no avail.

    Buhari had a veritable window provided by the Appeal Court judgment to free Kanu and explore a political solution to the crisis. But he allowed that opportunity slip until he left office.

    Curiously, Buhari’s hard-line position on insecurity in the region contrasted sharply with his policies in the northeast where amnesty and the so-called de-radicalisation of terrorists had been the official policy. He may have his biases as one of the military officers that fought in the Nigerian civil war. But as Paul Robeson cautioned, “the answer to injustice is not to silence the critic but to end the injustice”.

    Read Also: Nnamdi Kanu’s health deteriorating, family cries out

    With the emergence of the President Tinubu regime, the fate of Kanu vis-a-vis insecurity in the southeast has resonated. Around August last year, the five governors of the southeast met in Enugu to brainstorm on how to resolve the insecurity in the zone even as some of them had exploited the situation to feather their political nests.

    In a communiqué after the meeting, the governors among others stated “categorically that the perpetrators of insecurity in our region and their sponsors are criminals and should not be seen as legitimate agitators…upon arrest, they should be dealt with in accordance with the laws of the land”.

    Again, after the recent release of Yoruba nation agitator, Sunday Adeyemo (Sunday Igboho) by the president of Benin Republic, Patrice Talon through appeals by Yoruba leaders, the Ohaneze Ndigbo also appealed to President Tinubu to withdraw all charges against the IPOB leader. They said the release of Kanu would play a pivotal role in restoring peace in the southeast region and help in addressing the prevailing insecurity.

    There is a common thread running through the positions of southeast governors, Ohaneze Ndigbo and Kanu on the insecurity in the region and the way out of it. The governors are in agreement with Kanu’s view that the perpetrators of insecurity and their sponsors are criminals and should not be seen as legitimate agitators.

    Ohaneze and opinion leaders in the region are also in agreement that freedom for Kanu is key to the restoration of peace in the region and addressing the lingering insecurity. These are common denominators in the issues raised by Kanu during his brief interview. It is as well good that he was allowed to speak to the public. He made commitments to help restore peace and security and was heard.

    There are musings that his public outing through that interview may signal a new attitude to his case and possible release by the federal government. That will be in consonance with the expectation of the people of that region. The country is currently assailed by multidimensional insecurity to which the current government is battling to contain.

    If the release of Kanu will restore peace and address insecurity in the zone as attested to by the leadership of the zone, it is in the national interest that that option be fully explored. President Tinubu has a chance to make history by heeding to the prevailing feelings that Kanu’s release is pivotal to peace and security in that region.

  • Catholic Bishops call for Nnamdi Kanu’s release

    Catholic Bishops call for Nnamdi Kanu’s release

    The president of the Catholic Bishops Conference of Nigeria, Most Rev. Lucius Ugorji, has urged President Bola Tinubu to release the detained leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Mazi Nnamdi Kanu, to restore socio-economic life to the southeast.

    Ugorji, who is the Archbishop of Owerri Catholic Archdiocese, appealed the ordination of Most Rev. Thomas Obiatuegwu as Auxiliary Bishop of Orlu Diocese of the Catholic Church in Nigeria at the Holy Trinity Cathedral, Orlu, Imo state.

    He argued that the continued detention of Kanu fuels insecurity in the southeast, saying people are still afraid to go about their daily businesses due to the activities of non-state actors.

    According to him, billions of naira have been lost in the region due to the Monday sit-at-home order, which has serious effects on the residents, particularly the poor.

    Ugorji commended Governor Hope Uzodimma for stepping up the fight against insecurity in Imo State and thanked him for ensuring a safe and successful ordination.

    He said: “We thank Gov Hope Uzodimma for stepping up security to guarantee the safety of citizens of Imo State

    “I thank my brothers who took the risk from far and wide to attend today’s occasion despite the insecurity challenges across the country particularly in the southeast. Insecurity has become an issue in the Southeast.

    Read Also: Violence will cease in Southeast after my release, says Nnamdi Kanu

    “Unfortunately, the sit-at-home order has continued to paralyse economic and social lives in the Southeast.

    “There has been repeated outcry in the Southeast, business operators have lost billions of naira because of sit-at-home orders. Many poor families are afraid to come out on Mondays.

    “This is fueled by the continued detention of Mazi Nnamdi Kanu, the IPOB leader. I appeal to President Bola Ahmed Tinubu to explore civil remedy to release Nnamdi Kanu for peace to return to the southeast.”

    Governor Uzodimma felicitated Most Rev. Obiatuegwu on his ordination as Auxiliary Bishop of Orlu Diocese and urged the clergy and laity to allow the growth of the church to translate into moral and spiritual uplifting of the larger society.

    Uzodimma, who congratulated Obiatuegwu on his elevation expressed confidence that he would discharge his duties accordingly.

    He rejoiced with the diocese for its record growth of about 50 per cent in the last year and urged the clergy and laity to allow the growth to translate into moral and spiritual uplifting of the larger society.

     “The church, apart from the family and the school, is the most influential agent of socialisation.

     “I would therefore expect that the growth we are experiencing will translate to the spiritual uplifting of the larger society,” he said.

    The substantive Bishop of Orlu Diocese, Most Rev. Augustin Ukwuoma, urged the laity to hold firm to the gift of the church and support the leadership of the diocese and the church. He thanked Gov. Uzodimma for his efforts in improving the security situation in the state, enabling a safe and successful ordination.

    Obiatuegwu thanked the Bishops’ Conference for finding him worthy to be ordained and pledged his readiness to learn and serve. He thanked all clergy, comprising 40 bishops, as well as the laity and government officials, including Sen. Osita Izunaso (Imo West), who identified with him and pledged his commitment to his episcopal ministry.

    Obiatuegwu was appointed as Auxiliary Bishop in January 2024 by the spiritual head of the Catholic Church worldwide, His Holiness, Pope Francis.

    Until his appointment, Obiatuegwu, who hails from Uli, Ihiala council area of Anambra, was the parish priest of St Thomas Catholic Church, Umuahia, in Abia.

  • UPDATED: Violence will cease in South East once I’m released, says Nnamdi Kanu

    UPDATED: Violence will cease in South East once I’m released, says Nnamdi Kanu

    Detained leader of the proscribed separatist group, the Indigenous Peoples of Biafra  (IPOB) Nnamdi Kanu has pledged to work to stop the current spate of violence in the South East once he regains freedom.

    Kanu, who was denied bail on Tuesday by a Federal High Court in Abuja, spoke shortly after the court’s proceedings.

    The IPOB leaders said: “Anybody committing crime cannot go free. I swear it. Anybody committing crime in the East cannot go free. 

    “They are doing it because I am in the DSS ( custody). If I were to be outside, nobody can try this. I suspect that some people in government are complicit. They are making money with the insecurity. 

    “They know if Nnamdi Kanu is outside, in two minutes this nonsense will stop. Who is the bagger or idiot that will speak when I am talking?

    “That, I will give an order in the East, who is the idiot that will counter it? Nobody can. I am Nnmadi Kanu. Rubbish!

    “Anybody involved in any form of violence in the East in the name of IPOB is a goner and they know it. Let me come out of this mess, only two minutes, there will be peace in the East,” he said.

    During the proceedings, Justice Binta Nyako gave a ruling, dismissing the fresh bail application brought by Kanu.

    Justice Nyako held that the court cannot grant Kanu bail on the fresh application having rejected an earlier on.

    Justice Nyako was of the view that the only option opened to Kanu was for him to appeal the earlier decision of the court, refusing him bail.

    The judge also rejected Kanu’s request to be allowed unfettered access to anybody who wishes to visit him in custody of the Department of State Services (DSS) where he is being held.

    She said if Kanu was uncomfortable with the conditions attached to visitation by his lawyers, he could apply for a variation rather than filing a fresh application.

    The judge also rejected an oral application by Kanu’s lawyer, Alloy Ejimakor that the defendant be moved out of the custody of the DSS to Kuje prison.

    Justice Nyako said the court had ruled on a similar request before now and rejected it. She advised the defendant to explore the option of appeal.

    Ejimakor claimed that DSS operatives were infringing on his client’s fundamental rights by interfering with his conversations with his lawyers and family members.

    Read Also: UPDATED – Nnamdi Kanu disassociates self from killings, violence in south east

    He said such a situation makes it difficult for the defendant to prepare for his defense. 

    Justice Nyako also rejected another request by the defendant that he should be placed under house arrest in any part of Abuja.

    His lawyer had, while making the application, claimed that Kanu was tired of being in DSS’ custody for reasons, which include that his health challenges were not being properly managed.

    In refusing the request, Justice Nyako said Kanu would be well secured in the custody of DSS, but that if he feels strong about being restricted to a property in Abuja, he should file a formal application to that effect.

    The judge then adjourned till April17 for trial.

  • UPDATED – Nnamdi Kanu disassociates self from killings, violence in south east

    UPDATED – Nnamdi Kanu disassociates self from killings, violence in south east

    The detained leader of the proscribed Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Nnamdi Kanu, on Tuesday, disassociated himself from the ongoing killings and violence in the south east.

    Kanu, who spoke in an interview with newsmen shortly after Justice Binta Nyako of a Federal High Court, Abuja adjourned his trial until April 17, said the organisation, which he leads, is not a violent one.

    He vowed that those behind the violence leading to wanton killings of their fellow brothers and sisters and burning of property under the guise of being IPOB members would not be spared.

    The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that Justice Nyako had earlier rejected his bail application and a preliminary objection filed on his behalf by his lawyer, Alloy Ejimakor.

    Speaking, the IPOB leader noted that the violence persisted because he was being held in the custody of Department of State Services (DSS) and vowed that if released, there would be peace in the entire south- east region of the country.

    According the IPOB leader, “Anybody committing crime cannot go free. I swear. Anybody committing crime in the south east cannot go free.

    “They are doing it because I am in the DSS custody. If I were to be outside, nobody can try that.

    “I suspect that some people in government are complicit.

    “They are making money with the insecurity.
    They know if Nnamdi Kanu is outside, in two minutes this nonsense will stop.

    “Who is the bagger or idiot that will speak when I am talking? That I will give an order in the east, who is the idiot that I will give an order that will counter it ?

    “Nobody can. I am Nnamdi Kanu. Rubbish!.

    “Anybody involved in any form of violence in the east in the name of IPOB is a goner and they know it. Let me come out of this mess, only two minutes, there will be peace in the east”, he said.

    Earlier, Kanu and his lawyer, Alloy Ejimakor, applied that he should be transferred to Kuje Correctional Centre following the refusal by the court to admit him to bail.

    They said granting the request would enable them prepare for their defence adequately.

    Ejimakor insisted that Kanu’s lawyers were having difficulty in consulting with him at the Department of State Service (DSS)’s custody where he is currently kept.

    He said that they won’t be able to proceed with the trial unless the detained IPOB leader is moved from the DSS custody.

    He alleged that the DSS personnel usually confiscate documents brought for Kanu by his lawyers.

    He also alleged that the security operatives usually stop them from taking notes during visitation, and that they eavesdrop on Kanu’s consultation with lawyers on matters pertaining to his defence, among others.

    The lawyer then urged the court to make an order transfering him to Kuje Correctional Centre for them to have adequate time and facility to defend him in accordance with Section 36(6)(b) and (c) of the 1999 Constitution.

    Also speaking in the open court after he was granted leave to speak, Kanu pleaded with the court to send him to the correctional centre.

    He said besides that he was not free to consult with his team of lawyers any time they visited, the DSS had no medical facility good enough to take care of his health.

    The IPOB, in a dramatic mode, pulled off his top Liverpool sports wears, to show the judge parts of his armpit, to complain about his alleged poor treatment.

    But Justice Nyako refused the oral application seeking the transfer of Kanu to Kuje Correctional Centre, saying an order declining the request had already been made in the past.

    She said the only option was for the defence to challenge the order at the Court of Appeal.

    Besides, the judge held that the prison was insecure.

    She said in the past, no fewer than 15 terrorism suspects had escaped from the correctional centre.

    Kanu then sought that an order should be made placing him under house arrest instead of the DSS facility.

    He alleged that his continuous detention at the DSS custody did not augur well with him going by his state of health.

    Justice Nyako, rather, directed Ejimakor to apply for variation of conditions granted to visit Kanu in the detention.

    Then Ejimakor applied that Kanu should be kept in a private custody in order to allow his lawyers free access to him.

    He said this was there concern going by Section 36 of the constitution.

    The judge said since the court is a court of record, the request should be filed to afford the prosecution to also respond appropriately.

    Counsel for the Federal Government, Chief Adegboyega Awomolo, also disagreed with Ejimakor’s application.

    The senior lawyer said an order of court had already been made and that the action of the defence was to delay trial after the court had already granted an accelerated hearing of the matter.

    He said that there was a guideline for lawyers visiting Kanu at the DSS facility but more often than not, they flouted the directive.

    He said the practice was that any lawyer paying a visit to the defendant must first write the director-general of the security outfit for clearance.

    He said this was to guard against where a visitor would come into the custody with the intention to harm the IPOB leader, thereby, causing unnecessary problem in the country.

    Read Also: BREAKING: Court declines Nnamdi Kanu’s fresh bail request

    Awomolo said even though the defendant had a team of lawyers, there had been a time where a lawyer who visited Kanu was not even known to him.

    He said there was no where in the world where a terrorist suspect is allowed to move freely.

    The senior counsel said he was ready to proceed with the trial and that their witnesses were in court.

    But Ejimakor disagreed saying his client should be kept in a place where they would be well prepared to.defend their case.

    Justice Nyako adjourned the matter until April 17 for hearing.(NAN)

  • BREAKING: Violence will cease in southeast once I’m released, says Nnamdi Kanu

    BREAKING: Violence will cease in southeast once I’m released, says Nnamdi Kanu

    Detained leader of the proscribed separatist group, the Indigenous People’s of Biafra (IPOB), Nnmadi Kanu, has pledged to work to stop the current spate of violence in the southeast once he regains freedom.

    Kanu, who was denied bail on Tuesday by a Federal High Court in Abuja, spoke shortly after the court’s proceedings.

    The IPOB leaders said: “Anybody committing crime cannot go free. I swear it. Anybody committing crime in the east cannot go free. 

    “They are doing it because I am in the DSS ( custody). If I were to be outside, nobody can try this . I suspect that some people in government are complicit. They are making money with the insecurity. 

    “They know if Nnmadi Kanu is outside, in two minutes this nonsense will stop. Who is the bagger or idiot that will speak when I am talking.

    Read Also: Court dismisses Nnamdi Kanu’s appeal on unlawful arrest, detention

    “That, I will give an order in the East, who is the idiot  that will counter it ? Nobody can. I am Nnmadi Kanu. Rubbish!. 

    “Anybody involved in any form of violence in the East in the name of IPOB is a goner and they know it. Let me come out of this mess, only two minutes, there will be peace in the East,” he said.

  • JUST IN: Nnamdi Kanu seeks transfer from DSS detention to Kuje prison

    JUST IN: Nnamdi Kanu seeks transfer from DSS detention to Kuje prison

    Nnamdi Kanu, the leader of the jailed Indigenous People of Biafra, has asked the Federal High Court to transfer him from the Department of State Services (DSS) custody to Kuje prison.

    He alleged that there was a plot to have him killed while under the Department of State Services’ custody.

    He also added that the DSS didn’t provide a medical facility to treat him.

    He said: “People will come to see me they will not allow them. They don’t have a medical facility. I have congestive heart failure. They are patching me up.

    Read Also: BREAKING: Court declines Nnamdi Kanu’s fresh bail request

    “My foot is swollen. I asked them to conduct surgery, and they said they couldn’t. There is a conspiracy to die in detention. I want to be transferred to Kuje.”

    Details shortly…