Biafra nation agitator, Nnamdi Kanu, has stated that he was deceived into entering a plea in a charge which he claims does not exist.
This he stated as Justice James Omotosho of the Federal High Court in Abuja handed Kanu the final opportunity to open his defense, as failure to do so will be deemed as he having waived that right. The court has therefore fixed 7 November for this crucial stage of the case.
Proceedings at the terrorism trial this Wednesday was for Kanu to open his defense, but he insisted that there was no charge against him.
According to Kanu, “the so-called charges are rooted in a repealed statute” adding, “this is more or less a ghost trial.”
”I was duped and deceived into pleading to a charge that does not exist,” Kanu further stated. But when the judge asked, “who deceived you?” he gave no clear reply but restated his claim that the prosecution has no case against him.
The defendant told the Court that he is currently on trial based on the Terrorism Prevention (Amendment) Act 2013, which was repealed and replaced by the Terrorism Prevention and Prohibition Act 2022. He therefore restated that the case is legally unsustainable as the charge against him has not been amended.
Kanu also informed the Court that he has engaged the services of consultants. These are four persons who were part of his recently disengaged legal team. The consultants are Nnaemeka Ejiofor, Aloy Ejimakor, Maxwell Opara, and Mandela Umegbogu.
In his intervention, Justice James Omotosho noted that the matter on repealed law or not is meant for the final written address. The judge restated the need for the defendant to engage the services of experts in criminal law owing to the crucial nature of the case.
After the trial hit yet another snag, the trial judge stated that he feels inclined to grant yet another adjournment, a final opportunity for Kanu to open his defense. He therefore restated that Kanu’s failure to open his defense will amount to deeming the case closed.
The judge thereby clarified that the right to fair hearing can be “waived expressly or by conduct.” He further stated the need for the defendant to be well guided at this crucial point in the terrorism trial.
Godfrey Eshiomogie
About the Author
