•IPOB Leader Nnamdi Kanu and his lawyers in court
Leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra, Nnamdi Kanu who is currently being detained has opposed the request by the federal government for the resumption of his trial.
Kanu’s lead counsel, Aloy Ejimakor, revealed in a post on X yesterday.
According to him, his client Kanu had rejected the federal government’s bid to reopen the trial and insisted that the trial judge, Justice Binta Nyako, must recuse herself from the case.
Kanu’s lawyer, Ejimakor argued that Justice Nyako’s decision to recuse herself was still valid and binding.
“Our position is based on the fact that Justice Nyako entered and enrolled an order recusing herself on September 24, 2024, and to date, that order remains extant and subsisting. It has not been set aside by any competent court,” Ejimakor stated.
He further accused the prosecution of attempting to mislead the court, insisting that Kanu no longer has a case before Justice Nyako.
“For the avoidance of doubt, as of September 24, 2024, the defendant no longer has any case to answer before Justice Binta Nyako,” Ejimakor said.
Kanu who is being prosecuted on seven counts of alleged treasonable felony and terrorism, has pleaded not guilty to all charges.
He was first arrested on October 14, 2015, following his return to Nigeria from the UK and was later granted bail in 2017 on health grounds after being detained at the Kuje correctional facility.
Kanu later fled the country following a raid by the military on his home and moved back to the United Kingdom but was later re-arrested in Kenya in 2021 and brought back to Nigeria and has been detained in the custody of the Department of State Services.
At the last court session on September 24, 2024, Kanu requested that Justice Nyako, recuse herself.
He cited a loss of confidence in her handling of the case.
Justice Nyako agreed to recuse herself and forwarded the case file to the Chief Judge of the Federal High Court for reassignment.
However, the Chief Judge returned the case to Justice Nyako, stating that two other judges had previously recused themselves, and Justice Nyako, having handled the matter since 2015, was best positioned to conclude it.
The Chief Judge instructed that if Kanu still wanted Justice Nyako to step aside, he must file a formal motion with an affidavit detailing his reasons, serve it on the prosecution, and await Justice Nyako’s determination.
Despite this directive, the federal government’s counsel, Adegboyega Awomolo (SAN), requested a new trial date in December 5, 2024, in a letter addressed to the Deputy Chief Registrar of the Federal High Court.
Awomolo argued that the Chief Judge’s decision reinstated Justice Nyako as the trial judge.
Demanding Justice Nyako’s withdrawal from his case at the previous proceedings, Kanu, who shouted down his lawyer and spoke for himself, maintained that he did not trust the judge to be impartial.
Kanu’s repeated applications for fresh bail have been turned down by Justice Nyako.
Addressing the judge directly, Kanu said, “My Lord, I have no confidence in this court anymore and I ask you to recuse yourself because you did not abide by the decision of the Supreme Court.
“I can understand it if the DSS refused to obey a court order, but for this court to refuse to obey an order of the Supreme Court is regrettable. I am asking you to recuse yourself from this case.”
However, the prosecution counsel, Awomolo, urged Justice Nyako to disregard Kanu’s claim of disobeying a Supreme Court order and proceed with the hearing.
“My Lord, you should not recuse yourself on the basis of this mere observation which does not have anything to do with the Supreme Court. It is an incompetent observation. We urge this court to proceed with the hearing,” Awomolo said.
But Kanu vehemently objected, waving a copy of a document in his hand which he said was a copy of the subsisting judgment of the Supreme Court.
He proceeded to read a part that said the actions of the trial court rendered the impartiality of the judge suspect.
He also tried to explain to the judge that his objection to her presiding over his matter was not personal but that he was now fed up with the trial, which, according to him, was at variance with constitutional provisions.
Declaring her stance on the matter, Justice Nyako declared: “I hereby recuse myself and remit the case file back to the Chief Judge.”
