BIAFRA: FG Set to Begin Fresh Trial of Nnamdi Kanu, Adds Terrorism to 11-Count Charge

ECOWAS court adjourns ruling till Feb 9

Those who were ex­pecting the release of Nnamdi Kanu, the embattled leader of the Indigenous Peoples of Bi­afra (IPOB), may have to wait much longer.

After two botched trials, the Federal Government on Tues­day re-arraigned the IPOB leader and three others on an 11-count charge of treasonable felony, illegal possession of fire­arms and terrorism.

Kanu and his co-defend­ants were re-arraigned before Justice Binta Nyako of the Fed­eral High Court in Abuja after they were earlier docked before Justice John Tsoho of the same court in the nation’s capital.

In the amended charge dat­ed November 7, 2016 and filed by the Director of Public Prose­cution (DPP) of the Federation, Mohammed Umar, the Feder­al Government added five more charges to the earlier six the de­fendants were arraigned.
The government includ­ed a new defendant, one David Nwawusi, in the case. The two others, Onwudiwe Chidiebere and Benjamin Madubugwu, had been charged along with Kanu in the first six-count charge.
When the case was called for hearing yesterday, all the de­fendants pleaded not guilty to the charges when these charges were read to them.
Kanu, alongside Chidiebere and Madubugwu, were first ar­raigned before Justice Shuaibu Usman of a Magistrate Court in Wuse Zone 2, Abuja, who dis­missed the case following a mo­tion by the prosecutor, the De­partment of State Services (DSS) that the court lacked jurisdiction to entertain the suit.
At the Federal High Court, Abuja, Justice Ahmed Moham­med, who was first assigned the case, withdrew from the matter following allegations by the de­fendants that they would not get fair hearing from the court even before they took their not guilty plea.
Another judge, Justice John Tsoho, toed a similar line after he was petitioned at the National Judicial Council (NJC) on allega­tions of bias.
Consequently, the case file was returned to the Chief Judge of the Federal High Court, Justice Ibrahim Auta, before it was re-as­signed to Justice Nyako.
Of the fresh charges, terror­ism was added while the scope of the previous charges was ex­panded.
Count one of the charge read: “That you Nnamdi Kanu, ‘M’, On­wudiwe Chidiebere ‘M’, Benjamin Madubugwu ‘M’, David Nwawu­si ‘M’ and others now at large, on diverse dates in 2014 and 2015 in Nigeria and London, United Kingdom, did conspire amongst yourselves to broadcast on Radio Biafra monitored in Enugu and other areas within the jurisdic­tion of this Honourable Court, preparations being made by you and others at large, or states in the South East and South-South zones and other communities in Kogi and Benue States to secede from the Federal Republic of Ni­geria with a view to constituting same into a Republic of Biafra and you thereby committed an offence punishable under section 516 of the Criminal Code Act, CAP.C38 Laws of the Federation of Nige­ria, 2000.”
Justice Nyako adjourned hearing on the bail application till November 17, 2016.

ECOWAS court adjourns ruling till Feb 9
Also, yesterday, the Court of Justice of the Economic Commu­nity of West African States (ECO­WAS) adjourned ruling on Kanu’s fundamental human rights case against the Federal Government, till February 9, 2017 for final hear­ing.
The three-man panel of Jus­tice Micha Wilkins, Justice Yaya Boiro and Justice Akiaine Sallem headed the case.
Kanu was absent in court, but his lawyer, Mr. Ifeanyi Ejiofor, was present when the adjournment was made.
Joined in the suit were the Attorney-General of the Feder­ation and the Director-General of the Department of State Ser­vices (DSS).
Kanu asked the regional court for a compensation of $800 mil­lion for alleged violation of his human rights and an order di­recting his unconditional release and his personal effects.
Kanu has been in detention since October 14, 2015.
He prayed the court to de­clare that his continued deten­tion was a violation of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the United Nations Charter of 1970.
At yesterday’s session, Ejio­for claimed that he was ambushed with the application and prayed the court to discountenance it, insisting that it was a delay tac­tic to stop the court from hear­ing the case.
His arguments were based on Article 35 of the ECOWAS Court which frowned at such applica­tion. He further stated that the plaintiff’s rights had been gross­ly violated by the government and urged the court to dismiss the new application against the defendant, because it came after the adjourned date.
Responding to the Ejio­for’s argument, the government told the court that two munici­pal courts (the High Court and the Appeal Court) refused to grant the plaintiff bail, and as such should not be accorded it. The government said that while waiting for the judgment of the Appeal Court, the plaintiff “ran” to the ECOWAS Court, where he refused to disclose the rea­sons for the Nigerian court’s re­fusal to grant him bail
Thereafter, Justice Micha ad­journed the case till February 9, 2017.