Home » News » Treason Charge: Court admits Kanu’s statement, video clips in evidence
News

April 29, 2025

Treason Charge: Court admits Kanu’s statement, video clips in evidence

Kanu raises alarm, alleges tricks by FG to perpetually hold him down Leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra, IPOB, Mazi Nnamdi Kanu, has drawn attention to what he described as serial executive and judicial fraud being perpetrated against him since his extraordinary rendition in 2021. In an open letter addressed to Nigerians yesterday, Kanu said: ‘’In a judgment entered on March 1, 2017, the Federal High Court, Abuja, ruled that the ‘IPOB is not an unlawful group’. At the time, it received widespread publicity which can be verified. ‘’This landmark ruling (made by the court before it turned unjust) emanated in a criminal proceedings that required ‘proof beyond reasonable doubt’ and in which the federal government and my humble self presented our respective cases. ‘’Alas! Instead of the federal government to go on appeal as the law mandated (if they are dissatisfied with the judgment), the former Attorney-General (Abubakar Malami) went behind closed doors with a letter signed by late Abba Kyari and got IPOB proscribed/tagged a terrorist group in an ex parte proceedings that conducted without notice to me or to the IPOB. ‘’This abominable incident was the earliest sign yet that the government and its judiciary have struck an unholy and fraudulent alliance to deny me my rights and thereby imperil the life and liberty of millions who identity with IPOB. ‘’On October 26, 2022, a Federal High Court declared my extraordinary rendition and detention as unconstitutional, stating that: ‘the manner of arrest and detention of the Applicant (Mazi Nnamdi Kanu) in Kenya, his continued detention in Abuja, his subjection to physical and mental trauma by the Respondents, the inhuman and degrading treatment meted out to the Applicant amounts to a brazen violation of the Applicant’s fundamental right to dignity of his person and threat to life under Section 34 (1)(a) of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended).’ ‘’The court further ordered the federal government to apologize to me and pay me compensation. In a responsible society and well-ordered, run by a responsible government, this judgment is sufficient to have ended my lengthy detention and encourage the federal government to constructively engage me on the issue of the self-determination agitation that triggered this whole saga. ‘’Pedal back to October 13, 2022, when the Court of Appeal held that: ‘The courts must never shy away from calling the executive to order when they resort to acts of ‘executive lawlessness.’ ‘’The duty of the courts is to maintain a balance between ensuring that law and order is obeyed and the protection of the individual from oppressive actions by the executive. ‘’By the forcible abduction and extraordinary rendition of the Appellant (Mazi Nnamdi Kanu) from Kenya to this country on the 27th day of June 2021, in violation of international and state laws, the lower court or, indeed, any court in this country is divested of jurisdiction to entertain charges against the Appellant’. ‘’Despite the clarity of this judgment and its comportment with reason, the federal government refused to release me from detention while it went behind closed doors and connived with three other justices of the court of appeal who fraudulently and swiftly sat on appeal over the judgment and practically destroyed it by issuing what they termed ‘a stay of execution’. ‘’One may then ask: Is it not abominable for a court to stay a judgment the government already disobeyed? In a plethora of cases, the Supreme Court has held that anybody who disobeys a related court order cannot be given any judicial relief until such order is obeyed. ‘’This is a sound reasoning that applied to everybody but is fraudulently overlooked when it comes to my case. Fast forward to 15th December 2023 when the Supreme Court sent back my case to the Federal High Court for trial. ‘’For avoidance of doubt, that was not the only decision the Supreme Court made. It also decided that my bail should not have been revoked and it went on to state clearly that the judge exhibited significant and unacceptable bias by revoking my bail. ‘’In a sane society, one would expect that when the High court received my case from the Supreme Court and hankered down for trial, it was also duty-bound to restore my bail in line with the pronouncement of the apex court. ‘’But that did not happen. Why? Well, your guess is as good as mine and that is: the Court connived with the federal government to continue my detention in violation of Section 287 of the Nigerian Constitution. ‘’On September 24, 2024, I decided that I have had enough of taking my chances at getting justice from a judge that, in June 2021, sent me to secret police detention without fair hearing, later refused to transfer me to prison to better prepare for my trial and capped it all by refusing to restore my bail and instead ordering an accelerated trial in the face of the reality that I will never get a fair trial whilst detained at the DSS. ‘’These are the major reasons that compelled me to request recusal of the judge and having consented to it, she proceeded to make an order removing herself from my case. That order was never challenged on appeal; thus it remains extant to this day. ‘’But instead of the Chief judge of the Federal High Court to do the lawful thing by assigning my case to another judge, he connived with the federal government to eat crow and send my case to a judge that stands recused by a valid order. ‘’To conclude this open letter, let me make it clear that it should in no way be construed to mean that there are no decent judges in Nigeria that can be trusted to deliver even-handed justice in my case. That is not the issue. ‘’Instead, the issue is that my case is deliberately being shielded from judges and justices that are deemed to be committed to doing justice, even when it means that the federal government must lose. ‘’Be that as it may, if it will take the rest of my life in detention to produce me before a proper and impartial court, so be it. But let me say this for the world to know: I will not succumb to any trial conducted by any judge or court whose jurisdiction does not pass constitutional muster. Not now, not ever.’’

Nnamdi Kanu

….we arrested him in a hotel in Lagos, witness testifies

By Ikechukwu Nnochiri

ABUJA– The Federal High Court sitting in Abuja has admitted in evidence, an extra-judicial statement the detained leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra, IPOB, Mazi Nnamdi Kanu, made in 2015, shortly after he was arrested by operatives of the Department of State Services, DSS.

The statement was tendered before the court by a DSS operative that appeared as the first prosecution witness in the seven-count treasonable felony charge the Federal Government preferred against Kanu.

The witness, whose identity was shielded, was simply identified as PWAAA. He testified behind a screen.

In his Evidence-in-Chief, the witness told the court that he led the team of security operatives that arrested the defendant on October 14, 2015, in one of the rooms at Golden Tulip Hotel, Lagos International Airport.

Kanu, who was arrested upon his return to the country from the United Kingdom, UK, was said to be in the company of a lady when the operatives struck.

Aside from the statement, the witness, who was led in evidence by FG’s lawyer, Chief Adegboyega Awomolo, SAN, equal tendered video recordings of the interrogations that ensued after Kanu’s arrest.

While the video recordings were played in the open court, following a directive from the prosecution counsel, the witness also read out the statement Kanu made at the DSS.

Kanu’s legal team, led by a former Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Chief Kanu Agabi, SAN, did not raise any objection.

Four suitcases that contained various items that were recovered in the hotel room where Kanu was arrested, were equally produced before the court.

Related News

The suitcases contained personal belongings of the defendant, including equipment he allegedly used for his Radio Biafra broadcasts.

Trial Justice James Omotosho admitted the items in evidence and marked them as exhibits in the case.

Meanwhile, in the statement that was read in the open court, Kanu, denied his alleged link to violence in the South East region of the country.

He maintained that his struggle for the emancipation of the South East, South South and parts of Benue and Kogi states, was his fundamental human right and not terrorism as alleged by the government.

The embattled IPOB leader further contended that freedom fighting, which he was involved in, is neither a crime in Nigeria nor in any part of the world, describing it as a basic right.

More so, Kanu, in his statement, decried that he was interrogated by the DSS without the presence of his lawyer, as required by the law.

Confirming that he established Radio Biafra, the IPOB leader insisted that it was duly registered in the UK where he resided.

He further admitted not registering the radio station with the National Broadcasting Commission, NBC, saying he had no need to do so.

Disclaimer

Comments expressed here do not reflect the opinions of Vanguard newspapers or any employee thereof.