Justice James Omotosho of the Federal High Court, Abuja, has given the detained leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Nnamdi Kanu, till Monday, October 27, to open his defence in the terrorism charges against him.

The judge fixed the new date on Friday, following Kanu’s complaint that his former legal team, led by a former Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Kanu Agabi (SAN), had yet to release his case file to him for review.

When the case was called, Adegboyega Awomolo (SAN) appeared for the Federal Government and informed the court that the day’s business was for Kanu to begin his defence as earlier ordered. However, no lawyer represented Kanu.

Entering the dock with a bundle of documents, Nnamdi Kanu announced his appearance and told the court that his legal team, which he disengaged on October 23, had not handed over his case file.
He therefore sought an adjournment to enable him to obtain and study the file in preparation for his defence.

Kanu also informed the court of his intention to call 23 witnesses from within and outside Nigeria.

He urged the court to direct the Department of State Services (DSS) to allow the foreign witnesses access to him and to permit his lawyers to visit him on non-working days, a request Justice Omotosho granted.

In response, Awomolo described Kanu’s complaint as “strange,” noting that he had spent several hours in court earlier with his former lawyers. He reminded the judge that Kanu had been given six days to open and close his defence and urged strict adherence to the timeline.

Justice Omotosho, while expressing disbelief over the claim that Kanu Agabi withheld the case file, nonetheless granted the adjournment.

He cautioned against unnecessary delays, warning that many other cases had suffered setbacks because of the prolonged proceedings in Kanu’s trial.

The case was adjourned till Monday, October 27, for Kanu to open his defence.

Meanwhile, in his fresh notice of objection, Kanu is praying for the following reliefs:

*A declaration that the continued prosecution of the defendant under the repealed Terrorism (Prevention) Amendment Act 2013, and upon a proscription order obtained ex-parte and without fair hearing, violates sections 1(3), 36(1)-(12) and 42 of
the Constitution and Articles 7 and 26 of the African Charter, and is therefore, null and
void.

*A declaration that the Federal High Court’s ex-parte order proscribing IPOB, obtained without notice or hearing, while Justice Binta Nyako’s subsisting ruling (that IPOB is not a lawful society) remained in force, is unconstitutional, unlawful and cannot ground criminal liability.

*An order striking out or permanently staying counts one to eight, (save count 15) of the amended charge, dated 14th January 2022 for being barred by double jeopardy, having
the same factual ingredients as counts six-14 earlier struck out by the Federal High Court on 8th April 2022.

*An order declaring that the defendant’s extraordinary rendition from Kenya, without
extradition proceedings or due process violated Section 36(1) & (9) of the Constitution, the Extradition Act (Cap E25 LFN 2004), and Articles 12 and 13 of the African Charter, thereby robbing this honourable court of jurisdiction.

*An order nullifying all proceedings conducted in breach of the defendant’s right to adequate facilities for defence, confidential communication with counsel and fair hearing, particularly the eavesdropping, seizure of legal materials, and denial of unmonitored access.