By Nchetachi Chukuwajah
A Federal High Court in Abuja has given the leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Nnamdi Kanu, a final chance to defend his case or have his right to do so forfeited.
The warning followed Kanu’s refusal to open his defence in the seven-count terrorism charges brought against him by the Federal Government at the resumed hearing of the case on Tuesday, November 4.
At the court session, the trial judge, James Omotosho, warned Kanu that he has one final opportunity to open his defence on Wednesday, November 5 or risk forfeiting his right to do so.
Recall that Kanu had on October 23 dismissed his legal team and opted to represent himself in the case.
However, when the case came up on October 27, he told the court he had reviewed his case file and found “no charge” against him.
Justice Omotosho had cautioned the defendant that refusing to enter a defence after a no-case submission had been heard and dismissed was “very dangerous,” noting that it was the court’s duty to ensure fairness for all parties.
The judge advised Kanu to consult experienced lawyers to understand the implications of his decision.
At the resumed hearing on Tuesday, Justice Omotosho recapped the proceedings to date before inviting Kanu to speak.
Kanu again insisted that there was no valid charge against him and declared his continued detention by the Department of State Services (DSS) as illegal.
He further accused the court of violating a Supreme Court judgment that denounced his extradition from Kenya and demanded an immediate discharge.
When told that the same Supreme Court had remitted his case to the Federal High Court for trial, Kanu maintained that the terrorism charges against him were invalid and unconstitutional.
Kanu cited Section 36(12) of the 1999 Constitution and argued that there was no written law establishing terrorism as an offence in Nigeria.
He said: “In Nigeria today, the constitution is the supreme law; there is no provision for terrorism offence in the constitution. There is no valid charge against me. I will not go back to any detention today.
“Terrorism Prevention and Prohibition Act has been repealed. I cannot put in defence under a repealed law. I won’t do that.
“Tell any lawyer to show me the valid charge. I appeal to you to please take judicial notice of the repeal of the terrorism charges. I am not ready to go back to detention today unless I am shown the valid charge against me.
“I cannot be tried under a law that has been repealed; a law that is not written in our constitution. Prosecuting me under a repealed law is a violation of my fundamental right.”
In his response, the prosecuting counsel, Adegboyega Awomolo, said all the issues raised by Kanu were already addressed in the charges to which he had entered a plea.
Awomolo told the court that Kanu had served the prosecution a document purportedly supporting his claim of no valid charge, describing it as “useless” because it was neither signed nor stamped.
Omotosho ruled that the motion filed by Kanu and the prosecution’s response would be addressed in the court’s final written judgment.
The judge further appealed to Kanu to enter his defence, urging him to seek legal advice on the validity of the law under which he was charged.
He also said it was important for Kanu or any witness to give oral evidence under oath about his extraordinary rendition rather than relying solely on affidavits.
The judge subsequently adjourned the case till Wednesday, November 5, for Kanu to open his defence or have it deemed forfeited.
