Connect with us

Nigeria News

Latest Biafra news on Nnamdi Kanu, IPOB today Saturday, 9 April 2022

Published

on

Justice Binta Nyako of the Federal High Court Abuja, on Friday, struck out eight of the 15 terrorism and felony charges preferred by the Federal Government against the detained leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra, Nnamdi Kanu.

Justice Nyako freed Nnamdi Kanu on the eight counts while ruling on a preliminary objection filed by the IPOB leader.

“In this instant preliminary objection application, I have read the counts and come to the conclusion that counts six, seven, eight, nine, 10, 11, 12 and 14 have not disclosed any offence against the defendant.

“‘Counts one, two, three, four, five, eight and 15 show some allegations, which the defendant has to answer.

“The court shall proceed to try the defendant on those counts,” Justice Nyako said.

She, therefore, ordered that counts six, seven, nine, 10, 11, 12 13 and 14 should be struck out.

Nyako also ruled that the order proscribing IPOB as a terror group still subsisted until it was vacated since the issue was still on appeal.

She dismissed the argument of Chief Mike Ozekhome, SAN, counsel for Kanu, that whether IPOB was a terrorist organisation under the Nigerian law or not was still a subject of the appeal.

On Kanu’s bail plea, the judge directed counsel to the parties to present their arguments.

Ozekhome, therefore, argued that his client had never flouted any of the bail conditions, but that Kanu only escaped for his dear life during an attack at his residence.

Citing judicial authorities, he said that “until a person is tried and convicted, he should be allowed to walk free.”

He said his client was still innocent until proven otherwise.

“I humbly urge my lord to use your discretion to grant him bail subject to my lord’s condition,” he said.

But lawyer to the AGF, Shuaibu Labaran, disagreed with Ozekhome, contending that Kanu had violated all the bail terms.

He said because the IPOB leader jumped bail, that was why the court revoked his bail and ordered his arrest anywhere he was sighted.

Labaran further argued that what should be the subject matter before the court was the issue of a contempt charge against Kanu and not a bail application.

“My lord granted him bail in 2017 on health grounds, but since then to date, no medical record was submitted to the court until he jumped bail.

“What we should be saying is contempt of court because he has flagrantly violated the orders of the court,” he said.

He urged the judge to be guided by her discretion vis-a-vis the circumstances of the case.

The lawyer said in the alternative, that Nyako should make an order for an accelerated hearing on the matter so that Kanu could “know his fate one way or the order”.

The judge adjourned the matter until May 18 and May 26 for ruling on Kanu’s bail application and for trial continuation.