Justice James Omotosho of the Federal High Court has given the Biafra nation agitator, Nnamdi Kanu till November 5 to defend the terrorism charges against him or waive his right to do so. The Judge pleaded with him to consult with legal practitioners conversant with criminal laws to aid his defense or opt for a lawyer to handle his case for him.
The decision of the Judge followed the persistent refusal of Kanu to put in his defense to the terrorism charges on the ground that there was no valid charge against him. Kanu who announced appearance for himself on Tuesday pointed told the court that he would not go back to the detention unless the charges against him are clearly shown to him. Kanu maintained that his detention at the facility of the Department of the State Service DSS was illegal and unlawful because there was no known law he had breached. He accused the court of violating the Supreme Court judgment that condemned his extra ordinary rendition from Kenya and demanded that the judge must unfailingly and immediately discharged him.
When reminded that Supreme Court remitted the case for fresh trial, he went back to his insistence that the terrorism charge against him was incompetent, invalid and illegal. Citing section 36(12) of the 1999 Constitution, Kanu said that there was no written law on terrorism offence in Nigeria today, hence, there is nothing for him to defend.
DON'T MISS
After much persuasion and his insistence not to defend the charge, Justice Omotosho in a brief remark shifted further hearing till November 5 for Kanu to either enter his defense or waive his right to do so. At Tuesday’s proceedings, counsel to the federal government, Adegboyega Awomolo SAN had drawn the attention of the court to some documents served on him by Kanu adding that the documents are worthless and have no probative value because they were not signed and endorsed by the court.
He urged the court to discountenance the documents, permitting him to adopt his final address and fix a date for judgment. The Judge over ruled him, stating that the documents in court records are signed with evidence of payment.
Related
