January 18, (THEWILL) – The trial of the leader of the Indigenous People Of Biafra (IPOB), Nnamdi Kanu was stalled on Tuesday after he objected to the fresh charges brought against him by the Federal Government.
The Federal Government had filed fresh terrorism charges against Nnamdi Kanu before the Federal High Court on Monday.
Consequently, the initial seven counts bordering on treasonable felony and terrorism, against him, increased to 15.
At the resumed hearing held on Tuesday amidst heavy security presence, Kanu objected to the fresh charges.
Lead defence lawyer, Mike Ozekhome (SAN) sought for time to enable him study the amended 15-count charge filed by the prosecution on January 17, 2022.
Ozekhome argued that the defence was ambushed with the fresh charges by the prosecution. He claimed that the proof of evidence served on the defence by the prosecution was not legible enough to enable them know what constitutes the fresh charge.
Lead prosecuting lawyer, Magaji Labaran faulted the Ozekhome’s claim that the amended charge was an ambush.
Labaran also faulted the defence’s claim of Kanu not being properly fed, allowed to practise his religion and allowed free access to his family members.
He however did not object to the defence’s request for and adjournment, following which the judge, Justice Binta Nyako adjourned till January 19 for arraignment on the amended charge.
Addressing journalists after the proceedings Ozekhome said: “I have consulted with my client with regards to the 15-count charge. Some of the statements made by him that were not clear, which I pointed out to the court, the prosecution has been able to give me a copy that is more legible. With that, we will take the next step. No one is running from a plea being taken. But the point we made today, which the court appreciated, is that you can’t take plea to counts that have not been given to you.
“We were served some minutes to 10:00 am yesterday – a 15-count amended charge for a case coming up today, whereas, the last date of adjournment was 2nd of December so, they had well-over one month to do that, but they didn’t.
“I believe that was intended to frustrate today’s proceedings. In any event, that was the 6th time they are amending the charge. Each time they amend, I file a preliminary objection, they go back to the drawing board to re-amend.”
About the Author
