Justice James Omotosho of the Federal High Court, Abuja, has given the detained leader of the proscribed Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Nnamdi Kanu, a final opportunity to defend himself in the terrorism case brought against him by the Federal Government. The court fixed November 7 as the deadline for Kanu to present his defense or risk forfeiting that right.
During Wednesday’s proceedings, Kanu stood firm before the court, insisting that there was “no valid terrorism charge” against him, arguing that the case was being prosecuted under a repealed law and, therefore, null and void.
“The Terrorism Prevention and Prohibition Act has been repealed. I cannot put in a defense under a repealed law. I won’t do that,” Kanu told the court, maintaining that the prosecution had failed to comply with the Supreme Court’s earlier directive to amend the charges.
Kanu, instead of opening his defense, spent several hours addressing the court on why the charges could not stand. He cited the Supreme Court’s judgment ordering the Federal Government to amend the original charge, saying its refusal to do so was a “fatal flaw” that invalidated the entire proceedings.
“The Supreme Court made it abundantly clear that the Federal Government must amend the charge because the one against me has been repealed. Until now, that order has not been obeyed,” he said, adding that the continued reliance on a repealed statute violated due process.
In response, Justice Omotosho reminded Kanu of the importance of exercising restraint, urging him to “keep his gunpowder dry” and take advantage of the opportunity to defend himself.
At one point, Kanu appeared to soften his stance, saying he would consider opening his defense after consulting with his four legal advisers — Nnaemeka Ejiofor, Aloy Ejimakor, Maxwell Okpara, and Mandela Umegborogu.
The judge subsequently granted him permission to consult with his legal team and adjourned the matter, stressing that the fresh opportunity was granted “in the interest of justice for both the defendant and the nation.”
Justice Omotosho reiterated that failure to present a defense by the adjourned date would be deemed a waiver of that right, paving the way for the court to proceed accordingly.
