Nnamdi Kanu: Court summons Wike, Buratai, T. Y Danjuma, Uzodinma, others as witnesses

Justice James Omotosho of the Federal High Court, Abuja, has disclosed that the witness summons requested by Nnamdi Kanu to be issued against the Minister of the Federal Capital Territory, Nyesom Wike, and 22 others to give evidence in his terrorism trial have been signed and are ready for dispatch to the listed witnesses.

Others whose summons have been signed and ready for delivery are Imo state governor, Hope Uzodinma, Lagos State governor, Babajide Sanwoolu and two former Chiefs of Army Staff, General T. Y Danjuma and Tukur Buratai.

They are part of notable Nigerians listed by Kanu to be compelled by the judge to appear in court to give evidence in the terrorism charges slammed against him by the Federal Government since 2015.

Justice Omotosho announced in the open court on Thursday that he had given effect to Kanu’s request, signed the witness summons and that they are available for him to collect and serve on the said witnesses as required.

Kanu, had in a notice to defend, filed on October 21, listed the names of prominent Nigerians, including former and serving governors, ministers, military and security chiefs as his intended witnesses, who he said should be compelled to attend court.

The judge directed Kanu to pick up the witness summons and serve them individually as required by law to ensure quick response of the witnesses.

At Thursday’s proceedings, the detained leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra, IPOB, Nnamdi Kanu, announced that he had fired all members of his legal team.

Kanu, who announced the decision himself on Thursday, told the court that he was willing and ready to now conduct his own case by himself.

At the resumed hearing in Kanu’s terrorism trial on Thursday, the prosecuting lawyer, Adegboyega Awomolo, SAN, announced his team for the prosecution.

When it was time for the defendant’s legal team to announce appearance, the leader of the team, Kanu Agabi, SAN, stood up and told the court they were only present out of the respect for the court.

Kanu said they were in court to formally announce their withdrawal from further participation in the trial.

Agabi explained that the reason for their decision “is because the defendant has taken this case back from us and we respect that”.

He gave the names of the other SANs, who are also withdrawing to include: Onyechi Ikpeazu, Joseph Akubo, Paul Erokoro, Emeka Etiaba and one other.

Following Agabi’s announcement, Justice James Omotosho turned to Kanu, who was in the dock, for his response.

Kanu confirmed sacking all his lawyers and told the court that he was willing and ready to conduct his own case by himself.

Justice Omotosho then ordered other members of the defendant’s legal team, who were in court, except the SANs, to vacate the courtroom immediately, a directive they promptly complied with.

The judge then turned to Kanu and asked him to open his case.

In response, Kanu commenced by indicating his intention to make an oral submission, an indulgence the judge granted him despite opposition from the Federal Government lawyer.

Kanu said he would not open his defence as ordered by the court, because he was questioning the jurisdiction of the court to try him, adding: “This is a jurisdictional issue that goes to the heart of this case.”

He hinged his objection to the court’s jurisdiction on four grounds, the first being his claim that the Federal Government, through the prosecution, was in contempt of a Court of Appeal judgment, which he said ordered his acquittal and release.

Kanu argued that for the court to grant the prosecution audience, it (the prosecution) must first comply with the said Court of Appeal judgment.

He said the second ground was that the Terrorism Prevention (Amendment) Act 2013 and and Customs and Excise Act, under which the charge against him was brought, are repealed laws.

On the third ground, he claimed to have been denied fair hearing. He said his continued detention in the custody of the Department of State Services, DSS, has denied him the opportunity for adequate consultation with his lawyers to enable him prepare for his defence.

He hinged the fourth ground on his claim that the medical report submitted to the court by a medical team empanelled by the President of the Nigerian Medical Association, NMA, which certified him fit to stand trial, was forged.

Kanu denied being examined by any medical team, insisting that his blood and urine samples were never obtained for analyses.

He urged the court to declare the proceedings void and order his immediate release in line with the Court of Appeal judgment.

Reacting, Awomolo said Kanu deserved no formal response from the prosecution because all the allegations he made ought to be put down in the form of a sworn affidavit and effectively demonstrated to enable the other party respond appropriately.

Awomolo faulted Kanu’s claim that a Court of Appeal decision acquitted him, arguing that the said judgment was set aside by the Supreme Court in a judgment delivered on December 15, 2023.

He said: “The judgments of the Supreme Court that was given on December 15, 2023 has set aside the judgment they are claiming discharged him.

“If he has a preliminary objection he should file it and demonstrate all his claims,” Awomolo said.

The prosecuting lawyer also faulted Kanu’s claim that his right to fair hearing has been breached.

Awomolo argued that Kanu’s claim that the medical report was forged was an indictment on the senior lawyers.who were in his legal team, who, according to him, saw the report and found no fault in it.

He prayed the judge to determine all the issues that Kanu raised in his Thursday’s submission when delivering the final judgment.

In his intervention, Justice Omotosho noted that when the medical report was bought up in court on October 16, he sought the views of lawyers to both parties, who did not raise any objection to the report.

The judge said since the report has been admitted by the court, which acted on same and made decisions based on it, the court could no longer go back on the issue.

He said all the decisions taken by the court, based on the medical report, stand.

The judge noted that all the issues raised by Kanu in his Thursday’s submission were substantially raised in the no-case submission which the court overruled in a ruling delivered on September 26.

The judge said: “On the 26th of September 2015, I considered those issues and held that he has a case to answer. This was to enable him exercise his right to fair hearing to make his case.”

Justice Omotosho recalled that in the spirit of fair hearing, he vacated this courtroom on Wednesday from 9:00 am to 2:00 pm to enable Kanu and his lawyers have a private consultation session, despite the absence of evidence to support his claim that his conversation was being secretly recorded by the DSS, in whose custody he is being detained.

The judge said although all the issues raised by Kanu in his Thursday’s submission had previously been determined by the court, the defendant is not foreclosed and he can still raise them at the final written address.

He then proceeded to call on Kanu to open his defence and overruled him when the IPOB leader attempted to insist on his objection to the court’s jurisdiction.

Justice Omotosho said: “I call upon and appeal to the defendant to open his defence. I beg the defendant, in the name of the Almighty God, to comport himself and conduct his defence.

“This is the opportunity that the Constitution gives him under Section 36. It is a right that he can exercise or waive either expressly or by conduct.

“I beg and I appeal to the defendant to make use of the opportunity, given him by the Constitution to put in his defence, except he choses to waive it either expressly or by conduct.”

At that point, Onyechi Ikpeazu, SAN, intervened and drew the attention of the court to the fact that Kanu’s lawyers’ withdrawal took effect on the morning of Thursday.

He prayed the court to grant Kanu time to gather his thoughts and compose himself for the task ahead.

Taking a hint from what Ikpeazu said, Kanu said: “In the exercise of my right, I wish to state on record that I have not had the opportunity to prepare for my defence.

“I only had three hours yesterday in this courtroom. Section 36 of the Constitution allows me to be given adequate facilities to defend myself. My lord, I need time,” he said.

The prosecuting lawyer did not object, following which Justice Omotosho adjourned till Friday, October 24 for Kanu to open his defence.

He said the opportunity given the defendant to conduct his defence began to run from Thursday.

About The Author