An Abuja Federal High Court on Friday ruled that Leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra, IPOB, Mazi Nnamdi Kanu, has a case to answer in the terrorism charges against him, a ruling, Kanu’s lawyer says was not a pronouncement of guilty verdict but for him to mount his defence.
Kanu had made a no case submission through his lawyer, Chief Godwin Kanu Agabi (SAN), in a terrorism case filed against him by the Nigerian Government.
But in his ruling, Justice James Omotosho said he has a case to answer and ordered him to open his defence.
Justice Omotosho gave the ruling while upholding the arguments of the Prosecution led by Chief Adegboyega Awomolo (SAN).
The Court held that prima facie case has been established against him by the federal government and consequently ordered him to present his defense in the terrorism charges against him.
Omotosho held that it is in the best interest of Kanu to be given opportunity to clear some issues raised against him.
Recall that after the Nigerian government had closed its prosecution, Agabi had, among other arguments, said that throughout the proceedings, no single witness was called to tell the court how he was incited by Kanu to resort to violence.
He also informed the court that the five witnesses called during the trial, who are operatives of the Department of State Services (DSS), admitted that their roles were limited to obtaining statements from Kanu.
In its ruling, the court agreed with all the arguments canvassed by the prosecution and ordered Kanu to open his defence.
Commenting on the ruling, Kanu’s Special Counsel, Aloy Ejimakor, said the development was not a guilty pronouncement. He said the ruling represent a call for the IPOB leader to “mount his own defense.”
Ejimakor said: “Well, the ruling simply requires Nnamdi Kanu, the defendant, to enter his defense, it’s not a pronouncement of guilt or not guilty, so that is why it’s called a no-case submission. So the judgment, the ruling, that there is a prima facie evidence, that needs to be explained.
“So in common parlance, it calls on Kanu to come and mount his own defense.
“But there is the other aspect of the ruling that concerned extraordinary rendition, that very one is one that compounded us because the extraordinary rendition of Nnamdi Kanu is so open and notorious.”
