Embattled leader of the proscribed Indegenous People of Biafra, (IPOB), Mazi Nnamdi Kanu, his legal team and relatives have rushed into an emergency meeting on Wednesday after a Federal High Court sitting in Abuja which is hearing his case threatened to adjourn the matter “sine die” – indefinitely, if Kanu continues to stall commencement of trial.
Kanu’s lawyer, Aloy Ejimakor had earlier today gave 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.
But the prosecuting lawyer, Adegboyega Awomolo (SAN) objected to Ejimakor’s requests, describing them as frivolous vexatious, irritating, and unmeritorious.
Justice Binta Nyako who is entertaining the matter said the case should be opened to for commencement of trial and to enable the prosecution call his witnesses, threatening to adjourn indefinitely the trial should Kanu insist on further delaying the take – off of it.
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, April 17, 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.”
Rattled by the court’s warning and stance, Kanu, members of his legal team, and some relatives in court dashed into emergency meeting on what next option to take.
However, when the reconvened later, the prosecutors told Nnamdi Kanu, that he lacks the power to determine the procedure for his trial.
Prosecuting lawyer Adegboyega Awomolo (SAN) averred that no defendant has the right to dictate to court how his prosecution would be conducted in a criminal matter.
Awomolo was responding to some requests by Kanu’s lawyer, Aloy Ejimakor, who insisted that the requests must be met before his client would submit to trial.
The Federal Government is prosecuting Kanu for alleged terrorism and treasonable felony before a Federal High Court in Abuja.
According to The Nation’s report, Ejimakor argued two motions during yesterday’s proceedings.
In the first motion, Kanu prayed the court to restore the bail granted him in 2017, which the court later revoked when he fled the country following the invasion of his house by some soldiers.
Ejimakor argued that as against the claim by the prosecution, the court was misled to revoke the bail because Kanu did not jump bail or breach any of the conditions for the bail.
The lawyer averred that his client had to leave the country when the military allegedly invaded his house to avoid being killed.
He also prayed the court to vacate the arrest warrant the court issued against him while he was out of the country.
In the second motion, Kanu prayed the court to order his removal from the custody of the Department of State Services (DSS) to either a house arrest or a remand in prison custody.
The IPOB leader prayed the court to issue an order that would give his lawyers unhindered access to him to prepare for his defence.
He added that until his prayers are granted, as provided for under Section 36 of the Constitution, he would not submit himself for trial.
Responding, Awomolo opposed both motions and urged the court to reject them.
The prosecuting lawyer argued that by his motions, Kanu was seeking to dictate how his trial should go and how it should be conducted.
He explained that in a criminal matter, as the instant one, no defendant has the right to dictate to the court how his prosecution should be conducted.
Awomolo recalled that Kanu was once granted bail by the same court, but he jumped the bail by escaping out of the country under false claims.
He said the only option available to the defendant was for him to approach the Court of Appeal to challenge the rejection since the High Court could not overrule itself.
On Kanu’s request to be relocated from custody of the DSS, Awomolo said the only safe environment for Kanu was the DSS custody.
He urged the court to reject the defendant’s request for unhindered access for his lawyers.
Justice Binta Nyako adjourned till May 20 for ruling.
