The Federal High Court in Abuja, again on Wednesday, gave Biafra agitator Nnamdi Kanu another opportunity to either enter his defence in the on- going alleged terrorism trial or be foreclosed.
Issuing the warning, trial judge James Omotosho said he has the duty as a judge to accord Mr Kanu sufficient opportunity to put in his defence.
It came just a day after the judge gave Mr Kanu till today to open his defence, a scenario that has repeatedly played out in the last one month in the case.
The judge has severally adjourned the case in the last one month to keep the window of defence open, while Mr Kanu continues to stand his ground that there is no valid charge against him to defend.
“We had adjourned till today for the defendant to put in his defence or be deemed closed,” Mr Omotosho said in a ruling.
“But I am bound to give him another opportunity to put in his defence. If he does not, I will 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, failure which he would be deemed closed,” the judge said and adjourned till Friday (7 November).
The ruling was on an application by the prosecution lawyer, Adegboyega Awomolo, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), praying the court to foreclose Mr Kanu’s defence on Wednesday.
Mr Kanu is facing trial on terrorism charges which accuse him of inciting violence and killings in Nigeria’s South-east to achieve the independence of the region as a sovereign Biafra state.
The Nigerian and British citizen, who leads the now proscribed Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), has repeatedly denied wrongdoing. He insists he has a right to self-determination.
He has been due to open his defence after the prosecution closed its case with five witnesses in June.
Instead of opening his defence, he filed a no-case submission, arguing that the prosecution failed to lead credible evidence against him to warrant putting forward any defence.
However, in September, the judge dismissed the no-case submission, ruling that he had a case to answer and should enter his defence.
Since then, several proceedings have been scheduled for him to start his defence. Things took dramatic turns last month, when he suddenly sacked his lawyers and subsequently revived his objection to the validity of the charges.
He has clung to the arguments that the charges against him were brought under a repealed terrorism law, which he said invalidates the charges in the case that dates back to 2015.
Recommended for you
Leave a Reply
Leave a Reply
