Table of Contents
- Court Decision
- Legal Representation
- Defense Argument
- Judicial Reminder
- Federal Government Counsel's Argument
Justice James Omotosho of the Federal High Court has granted Biafra nation activist Nnamdi Kanu until November 5 to respond to the terrorism charges against him or forfeit his right to do so.
The judge encouraged him to seek advice from legal professionals knowledgeable in criminal law to assist with his defense or choose a lawyer to represent him.
This decision came after Kanu's continual refusal to present his defense against the terrorism charges, claiming there were no legitimate charges filed against him.
Kanu, who represented himself on Tuesday, informed the court that he would not return to detention unless the charges against him were explicitly presented.
He asserted that his detention at the Department of State Services (DSS) facility was unlawful, as he had not violated any known law.
Kanu accused the court of breaching the Supreme Court ruling that condemned his extraordinary rendition from Kenya and insisted that the judge must release him immediately.
When reminded that the Supreme Court had ordered a fresh trial for his case, he maintained that the terrorism charge was incompetent, invalid, and illegal.
Referencing Section 36(12) of the 1999 Constitution, Kanu contended that there was no written legislation on terrorism offenses in Nigeria, and therefore, there was nothing for him to defend.
“In Nigeria today, the Constitution is the ultimate law. There are no provisions for terrorism offenses in the Constitution. There is no valid charge against me. I will not return to any detention today.
“The Terrorism Prevention and Prohibition Act has been repealed. I cannot defend myself under a repealed law. I refuse to do that.
“Ask any lawyer to show me the valid charge. I urge you to recognize the repeal of the terrorism charges. I am not prepared to return to detention today unless I am shown the valid charge against me.
“I cannot be prosecuted under a law that has been repealed, a law that is not documented in our Constitution. Prosecuting me under a repealed law violates my fundamental rights,” he reiterated.
After considerable persuasion and his insistence on not defending the charge, Justice Omotosho, in a brief comment, adjourned the hearing until November 5 for Kanu to either present his defense or waive his right to do so.
During Tuesday's proceedings, counsel for the Federal Government, Adegboyega Awomolo (SAN), pointed out that he had received some documents from Kanu, asserting that the documents were worthless and lacked evidential value as they were not signed or endorsed by the court.
He urged the court to disregard the documents, allow him to present his final address, and set a date for judgment.
However, the judge overruled him, stating that the documents in the court records were signed and accompanied by proof of payment.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the deadline given to Nnamdi Kanu to respond to the charges?
Nnamdi Kanu has been given until November 5 to either defend the terrorism charges against him or waive his right to do so.
What was Kanu's argument regarding his detention?
Kanu argued that his detention was illegal as he had not breached any law, and he insisted that he would not return to detention unless valid charges were presented to him.
What did the judge state about the documents presented by Kanu?
The judge overruled the Federal Government's counsel's request to disregard the documents, stating that the documents in the court records were signed and included evidence of payment.
