A Federal High Court in Abuja has fixed November 20 to deliver judgment in the terrorism trial of leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB). Nnamdi Kanu.
The presiding judge, Justice James Omotosho, fixed the date on Friday, after Kanu failed to open his defence, having exhausted all the opportunities afforded him.
Kanu had previously refused to open his defence.
On October 24 the court had adjourned Kanu’s trial to October 27 to enable him commence his defence.
The defendant had disengaged his legal team, opting to defend himself, while insisting that there was no case against him.
On November 4, Justice Omotosho gave him one final opportunity to open his defence or risk forfeiting his right to do so.
Despite persuasions from the judge for the defendant to seek legal counsel and enter a defence, Kanu insisted that there was no valid charge against him and declared his continued detention by the Department of State Services (DSS) illegal.
He accused the court of violating a Supreme Court judgment that denounced his extraordinary rendition from Kenya and demanded an immediate discharge.
When reminded that the same apex court had remitted his case to the Federal High Court for trial, Kanu maintained that the terrorism charges against him were invalid and unconstitutional.
Citing Section 36(12) of the 1999 Constitution, he argued that there was no written law establishing terrorism as an offence in Nigeria.
At the resumed proceedings on Friday, Kanu told the court that he had an important process to file but claimed he had not been allowed to do so.
Following his complaints, Omotosho ordered that the court’s registry be temporarily relocated to the courtroom to allow Kanu complete the filing.
Proceedings in the case was then stood down for one hour to enable the filing to be concluded.
When the court reconvened, Adegboyega Awomolo, federal government’s counsel, told the court he would not respond to the motion filed by the defendant but that he would rely on some of the exhibits attached to the motions.
In the motion, Kanu is asking the court to expunge his “not guilty” plea from its record on the basis that it was deceptively arraigned contrary to Section 36 of the constitution.
He is also asking the court to completely cancel all record of proceedings so far because the trial was erected on an erroneous foundation. He further prayed the court to set him free immediately.
Although the court acknowledged the fresh motion and another filed on October 30 by the defendant, he said rulings on preliminary objections and motions would be treated during judgment.
Omotosho still pleaded with Kanu to open his defence but the separatist insisted that there was no charge against him.
Consequently, the judge held that having failed to utilise the opportunity granted him to enter his defence, Kanu cannot claim to have been denied the constitutionally guaranteed rights to fair hearing.
