The court of appeal in Abuja has reserved judgment in an
appeal filed by Nnamdi Kanu, leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB),
challenging criminal charges against him.
Kanu was re-arraigned on an amended 15-count charge
bordering on treasonable felony preferred against him by the federal
government.
However, on April 8, the judge struck out eight of the
15-count charge.
But Kanu through his team of lawyers led by Mike Ozekhome,
filed an appeal marked CA/ABJ/CR/625/2022, praying the court to quash the
remaining seven counts for being devoid of merit.
The appeal is equally praying the court to order his release
on bail, pending the determination of his appeal.
Although the appeal was initially fixed for October 11, the
court granted Kanu’s application for abridgement of time.
Moving the application at the court session on Tuesday,
Ozekhome alleged that his client was forcefully abducted from Kenya and
illegally renditioned back to the country.
He told the court that his client was first arraigned on
December 23, 2015, and was later granted bail on April 25, 2017.
“My Lords, he was enjoying this bail without breaching the
terms. However, he was in his ancestral home when agents of the respondent
invaded his home in September 2017,” he said.
“He barely escaped alive by sheer providence and found
himself first in Israel and later in London.
“When the appellant travelled from London to Kenya, agents
of the respondents, on June 27, 2021, forcefully abducted the appellant,
tortured and renditioned him back to the country without following any
extradition process.”
The senior lawyer argued that under the “doctrine of
speciality” as provided for in section 15 of the Extradition Act, the federal
government ought to have proceeded to try Kanu on the initial five-count charge
on which he was re-arraigned before he fled the country.
He argued that Kenya, being the country from where Kanu was
arrested and extraordinarily renditioned to Nigeria, ought to have authorised
his extradition and the new charges he is facing.
“This allegation of his forceful abduction and rendition was
never denied by the respondent,” Ozekhome said.
“More so My Lords, the charge appears to give the lower
court a global jurisdiction over offences that were allegedly committed by the
appellant, without specifying the location or date the said offences were committed.
“There was no need for the lower court to have retained the
remaining seven-count charge.
“The seven counts cannot stand being filed without following
due process.
“We are therefore urging My Lords to strike out the remaining
counts and hold that the respondent has not established any prima-facie case
against the appellant for which he could be tried.”
Responding, David Kaswe, counsel to the federal government,
asked the court to dismiss the appeal for want of merit.
“My Lords, it took four years and huge resources to get the
respondent arrested and brought back to face the charges against him,” he said.
“The prosecution is ever willing and eager to proceed with
trial of the appellant.
“We are saying that the trial court was even wrong to have
struck out the eight counts as it did.
“It is only after FG has produced all its witnesses and
tendered its evidence that the appellant could claim that no prima-facie case
was established.
“Finally, we urge this court to dismiss the appeal for
lacking in merit.”
After taking submissions from both parties the three-member
panel of justices led by Jummai Hanatu, said it would communicate a date for
the judgement.
Advertise on NigerianEye.com to reach thousands of our daily users
No comments
Post a Comment
Kindly drop a comment below.
(Comments are moderated. Clean comments will be approved immediately)
Advert Enquires - Reach out to us at NigerianEye@gmail.com