Nnamdi Kanu’s Trial On Terrorism, Felony Continues

There is heavy security presence around the Federal High Court in Abuja as the Federal Government continues the trial of Nnamdi Kanu, leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra, IPOB who has been detained on charges of terrorism and treasonable felony.

Access to the court, adjacent to the Federal Ministry of Justice headquarters, is restricted, with entry limited to individuals on a Department of State Services (DSS) vetted list.

READ ALSO: Lawyers To Demand Nnamdi Kanu’s Bail On Feb 26

This trial continuation follows the Supreme Court’s decision on December 15, 2023, allowing the Federal Government to proceed, overturning a previous Court of Appeal ruling that had quashed the charges and ordered Kanu’s release.

Nnamdi Kanu, initially arrested in Lagos on October 14, 2015, has faced a tumultuous legal journey accused of terrorism including a period of bail on health grounds and a dramatic escape from Nigeria, only to be re-arrested in Kenya and forcibly returned in June 2021.

Despite the appellate court’s unanimous decision in October 2022 to quash all terrorism charges against Nnamdi Kanu, citing illegal extradition practices by the Nigerian government, the Supreme Court has challenged this verdict, noting it was based on sentiment.

This legal back-and-forth has led to heightened tensions and increased security measures at the court, as stakeholders await further proceedings.

In the lead judgement prepared by Justice Garba Mohammed but read by Justice Emmanuel Agim, the apex court held that the Court of Appeal did not anchor its decision on any extant law in the country but on international statutes that Nigeria is a signatory to.

“As far as Nigeria is concerned, the lower court did not cite any Nigerian authority,” the apex court noted, even as it slammed FG for acting “irresponsibly”, when it bypassed the law to bring Kanu back to the country for the continuation of his trial.

“Be that as it may, what is the position of the Nigerian law, where an accused is saying an illegality has been committed against me?

“It is like saying that an evidence should not be admitted because it was illegally obtained. Our law is that, notwithstanding the procedure, it is still a valid evidence before the court.

“As far as Nigeria is concerned, the lower court did not cite any Nigerian authority,” the apex court noted, even as it slammed FG for acting “irresponsibly”, when it bypassed the law to bring Kanu back to the country for the continuation of his trial.

“Be that as it may, what is the position of the Nigerian law, where an accused is saying an illegality has been committed against me?

“It is like saying that an evidence should not be admitted because it was illegally obtained. Our law is that, notwithstanding the procedure, it is still a valid evidence before the court.

Insisting that judgement in such a case must be based on express legislation, the Supreme Court said it found no reason to align itself with the appellate court’s position.

“There is no legislation in Nigeria that says the trial court will no longer have jurisdiction where prosecution does anything illegal against a person standing trial.

“If prosecution destroys someone’s home in search of evidence, that will not stop the trial, but will raise a cause of action.

“We decline to go with the Court of Appeal, in as much as we strongly condemn what the prosecution did.

“Nigeria must be concerned about its image, both locally and internationally. If a person is standing trial, why must you invade his home? That is totally irresponsible,” the apex court added.

It held that FG ought to have approached the trial court if it felt that Nnamdi Kanu breached his bail conditions.

Besides, it held that the high court acted wrongly when it revoked the initial bail it granted to Kanu, saying the action was “totally unfair” since he took a flight to save his life.

“Nigeria barely recovered from the case of Umaru Dikko, and we should not repeat it,” the apex court warned as it upheld FG’s appeal marked: SC/CR/1361/2022 and dismissed Kanu’s Cross-Appeal marked: SC/CR/394/2022.

It ordered Nnmadi Kanu to go back and defend himself on the seven-count charge that is pending against him.

Nnamdi Kanu reportedly sacked his legal team after the judgement.

Send Us A Press Statement Advertise With Us Contact Us

 And For More Nigerian News Visit GWG.NG