The Federal High Court in Abuja has given the detained leader of the proscribed Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Nnamdi Kanu, one final opportunity to open his defence in his ongoing terrorism trial or risk being foreclosed.
Justice James Omotosho, presiding over the case, said on Wednesday that as a judge, it was his responsibility to guide the defendant, who is not a lawyer, and ensure he is given every fair chance to defend himself.
“We had adjourned till today (November 5) for the defendant to put in his defence or be deemed closed. But I am bound to give him another opportunity to put in his defence. If he did not, I would deem him closed. I know that he is an Economist and not a lawyer. I will give the last opportunity to the defendant to put in his defence, failing which he will be deemed closed,” Justice Omotosho stated.
The judge also directed the Department of State Services (DSS) to allow Kanu access to his consultants—who were previously his legal counsel—so that he could prepare for his defence, which is expected to open on November 7.
The decision came after the prosecuting counsel, Adegboyega Awomolo (SAN), urged the court to foreclose Kanu’s right to defend himself, noting that he had failed to use five of the six days allocated for his defence.
At the start of proceedings, Justice Omotosho reminded Kanu that the case was adjourned to allow him either to reconsider hiring a lawyer or to proceed with his own defence.
When asked to continue his defence, Kanu stood up and claimed he had something to say that “could embarrass the nation’s Judiciary.” He requested a private meeting with the judge and the prosecution in chambers, but Justice Omotosho refused, insisting that any statements be made openly in court.
The judge repeatedly asked whether Kanu’s comments involved any accusations against the court, but Kanu denied this, saying he had nothing against the judge personally.
He then stated that he wanted to file documents and consult with his advisers—identified as his former lawyers, including Kanu Agabi (SAN), P. A. N. Ejiofor, Aloy Ejimakor, Maxwell Opara, and Mandela Umegboru. Ejimakor informed the court that he had already prepared some documents for the defendant.
Reading from a prepared document, Kanu argued that the charges against him were invalid because they were “based on repealed laws that are no longer in existence.”
“I am being asked to enter defence. I will, but I must know the law under which I am being tried to enable me prepare my defence,” he said, adding that the prosecution failed to comply with a Supreme Court directive to amend the charge.
Kanu claimed his right to a fair hearing had been violated, alleging that he was “deceived into pleading to a charge that does not exist.” When asked who deceived him, he replied, “The prosecution deceived me by filing a charge under laws that do not exist. I was duped and deceived into pleading to a charge that does not exist.”
The prosecution’s lawyer, Awomolo, argued that Kanu’s continued refusal to present his defence was a clear disregard for the court’s order and urged the court to take note of his stance. He prayed the judge to foreclose the defence and fix a date for judgment.
Justice Omotosho, however, reiterated his earlier advice to Kanu to seek expert assistance from a criminal law professional, warning that criminal procedure was not an area for inexperienced persons.
“A lot of people are out there and you think they are experts in criminal procedure, they are not. It is not an area of law that people without experience can dabble into. Before man and God, I am here to give proper advice,” the judge said.
He advised Kanu to hold back certain arguments until the stage of final address, saying, “The issue you raised about repealed laws should be raised at the final address stage.”
Justice Omotosho also cautioned Kanu’s four consultants to adhere strictly to professional conduct after Awomolo accused them of granting media interviews and making subtle social media posts about the ongoing case.
