Detained leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra, Nnamdi Kanu has fired his legal team just as he opened his defence on Thursday in response to treason and terrorism charges brought by the Federal Government.
Kanu Agabi, former Attorney-General of the Federation and Kanu’s erstwhile lead counsel on Thursday, applied to withdraw his representation in the trial before the Federal High Court in Abuja.
Kanu is facing trial on a seven-count charge bordering on terrorism, filed against him by the Federal Government.
When the matter was called on Thursday, Agabi informed the court that he would no longer be representing the IPOB leader, adding that the defendant had decided to take back the case from them.
In the same manner, all the Senior Advocates of Nigeria involved in the case also announced their withdrawal from the case.
Kanu, confirming the development, told the court that he would be representing himself for now, but noted that the position might change later.
The trial judge, Justice James Omotosho, asked whether he should assign a lawyer to represent him, but the defendant (Kanu) declined.
Meanwhile, addressing the court orally to open his defence, Kanu argued that the court lacked jurisdiction to try him.
Justice Omotosho, had on October 16, granted the defendant six consecutive days, beginning from October 23, to open and close his defence in view of the accelerated hearing earlier granted in the case.
Kanu had listed former Attorney General of the Federation, Abubakar Malami; Minister of the Federal Capital Territory, Nyesom Wike; Minister of Works, Dave Umahi; Governor of Lagos State, Babajide Sanwo-Olu; a former Chief of Army Staff, Gen Tukur Buratai (rtd); a former Minister of Defence, Gen. Theophilus Danjuma (rtd), and others as part of his witnesses.
Following the development, the judge ruled that the defence must be opened without fail on Friday, October 24 or Kanu would be deemed to have waived the opportunity provided to him by law.
The judge’s decision followed Kanu’s insistence on defending himself in the trial while requesting a three-month adjournment. At this point, the judge reminded him that an accelerated trial schedule had already been set and still subsisted, meaning a long adjournment could not be granted.
Kanu, however, continued to challenge the jurisdiction of the court to proceed with the trial. The judge reminded him that the issue of jurisdiction had already been resolved against him. Justice Omotosho pleaded with Kanu to see reason and allow proceedings to move forward, but the defendant insisted that they should not.
Kanu stated: “Going forward, I am making an oral application challenging the jurisdiction of the court to try him. On the face of the records before this court, there are four jurisdictional defects in the matter. The Federal Government is in contempt of the Court of Appeal. I have been discharged by the Appeal Court but I remained in detention for 14 more months.
“A contemnor cannot come to the court to seek any remedy because he who goes to equity must appear with clean hands. The Act on which I am being tried has been repealed and therefore I could not be tried on a repealed Act. The prosecution had denied me proper consultation with my lawyers for the almost five years I had been held in custody.
“If not for your mercy, My Lord, to grant us three hours to hold conference in this courtroom, I would have been compelled to enter my defence in a capital offence without proper consultation with my lawyers. The medical report on which this court relied to declare me fit to stand trial was forged. The report was dated 23 September even though the court gave the order on 26, September.”
Kanu further argued that no blood or urine samples had been taken from him to conduct any test, rendering the medical report fabricated. Based on these claims, he asked the court to terminate the matter immediately if possible.
Responding, counsel to the federal government, Adegboyega Awomolo SAN, said that Kanu’s statements were not based on any recognised court procedure and amounted merely to entertaining the court.
In his ruling, Justice Omotosho said all preliminary objections would not be entertained at this stage, and the court order stood: the defendant must put in his defence. The judge noted that most of Kanu’s arguments had been raised before, but he is not foreclosed from addressing them again in his final written submissions.
At this point, one of the Senior Advocates present in court, Dr Onyechi Ikpeazu, requested permission to address the court, not as Kanu’s lawyer, but as a friend of the court. The senior lawyer appealed for an adjournment, even if only until October 24, to allow Kanu to gather his thoughts and begin his defence.
Justice Omotosho responded that it was for Kanu himself to make such an application, as he is now defending himself. “I appeal to the defendant to make use of the opportunity given to him to enter his defence, or waive it if he wishes,” he said.
In response, Kanu said he had not had enough time to prepare his defence, particularly given the capital nature of the trial, and that he also needed time to assemble the witnesses he had listed.
Ultimately, Justice Omotosho ordered that Kanu must open his defence without fail on October 24.
