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.
Advertise on NigerianEye.com to reach thousands of our daily users
No comments
Post a Comment
Kindly drop a comment below.
(Comments are moderated. Clean comments will be approved immediately)
Advert Enquires - Reach out to us at NigerianEye@gmail.com