Nnamdi Kanu, leader of the proscribed Indigenous People of Biafra, says his witnesses will come from countries like Ethiopia, Kenya, and the U.S.
Mr Kanu, who opted to defend himself in the ongoing alleged terrorism trial preferred against him by the federal government, gave the update on his witness on Friday before Justice James Omotosho of the Abuja Division of the Federal High Court.
Mr Kanu, in a motion filed on October 21, listed prominent Nigerians he intended to call as witnesses in his defence. Mr Kanu, in the application he personally signed, informed the court of his plan to call 23 witnesses, divided into two categories.
The first category, he said, would be those he called “ordinary but material witnesses”. He further informed the court that his second category of witnesses would be “vital and compellable” and would be summoned under Section 232 of the Evidence Act, 2011.
He urged the court, in view of the number of witnesses he intended to call, to consider granting a 90-day timeframe to enable him to conclude his defence.
When the case was called on Friday, Adegboyega Awomolo represented the FG, and Mr Kanu, who spoke from the dock, announced his appearance.
“I am Mazi Nnamdi Kanu. I stand for myself,” he said.
Mr Awomolo then told the court that the case was scheduled for defence and that they were ready to proceed.
But Mr Kanu said he was not prepared to commence his defence. He told the court that his disengaged lawyers had not handed over the case file to him.
Mr Kanu also told the court that the three-day weekly visit to him at the State Security Service facility would no longer be sufficient for him to prepare his defence, given the number of his witnesses, who would be coming from across the world.
When Mr Omotosho asked him what the visiting days and times were, the IPOB headpin said, “Two hours every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday. That is not enough because I have about 23 witnesses that will be coming from all parts of the world, from Ethiopia, Kenya, and the U.S. I will want the court to make an order so that these people can have access to me.”
When the judge asked him if these people were part of the witnesses he listed in the motion he filed, he said, “They are part of the witnesses listed, my lord.”
Responding, Mr Awomolo said Mr Kanu had ample time to defend himself, as his no-case submission application had failed. Besides, the lawyer said the court bailiff had been trying to serve the subpoenaed witnesses listed by Mr Kanu in his application for the summons to appear in court.
He said, contrary to Mr Kanu’s submission, he was not aware that “some of the witnesses are coming from parts of the world”.
Mr Awomolo, who did not oppose Mr Kanu’s request for adjournment, asked the court not to vacate the standing order that directed Mr Kanu to defend himself within six days.
“I am aware that there is a standing order for the defendant to defend himself within six days. The defendant wasted yesterday. This is the second day, my lord. I urge your lordship to keep to the standing order,” Mr Awomolo said.
Mr Omotosho said he was surprised by Mr Kanu’s statement that his lawyer had yet to hand over the case file, especially when Kanu Agabi was involved.
“I am surprised that Chief Agabi will keep the file to himself, having announced yesterday that the defendant will conduct the trial himself and told the counsel to leave,” he said.
The judge, however, observed that the issue raised on Thursday was not about the case file.
“The only issue raised was that of the jurisdiction, which I declined and said it should be raised in the final written address,” he said.
The judge said the parties agreed to an accelerated hearing when the court granted it. He said the prosecution threatened them, saying that if they refused to close their case within the stipulated time, their case would be foreclosed.
“However, in the interest of justice and a fair hearing, having raised the issue of the file this morning, though it is strange that Agabi will not release the file, I will grant an adjournment for the file to be given to the defendant,” Mr Omotosho said.
The judge also granted Mr Kanu’s application for his counsel to have access to him on non-working days for the purpose of the trial.
“This is hereby granted. The SSS should give him access on Saturday and Monday to have access to his counsel,” the judge said.
Mr Omotosho held that inasmuch as opportunity would be given to Mr Kanu, “I also repeat that the right in Section 36 of the constitution is given to a defendant to defend himself. It is not that a defendant must be compelled to make use of that right. This court is here to do justice, and I will do justice to everybody. The impression created when I assumed this trial was that there was a delay.”
The judge said that, against this impression, he created two sessions, morning and afternoon, in the court to ensure that Mr Kanu’s matter was given an expeditious hearing.
The judge noted that on October 22, the court did not sit until 2:00 p.m. because the court was vacated from 9:00 a.m. to allow Mr Kanu and his legal team to have a private consultation in line with an earlier order. Mr Omotosho said, however, on October 23, when Mr Kanu was to open his defence, nothing happened.
“With time, the court will invoke appropriate provisions,” he said.
He also said that, though the allegation that the SSS operatives were eavesdropping was not substantiated, he decided to grant the order for them to meet in his court.
“If I continue this way, other matters will suffer,” the judge said.
Mr Omotosho, therefore, ordered the SSS to provide another facility for the IPOB leader and his counsel to meet.
“I will not vacate this court for any pre-trial again because this opportunity was not used,” he held.
The judge then adjourned the matter until October 27 for Mr Kanu to open his defence.
(NAN)
