The detained leader of the proscribed Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Nnamdi Kanu, on Monday stunned the Federal High Court in Abuja as he dramatically abandoned plans to call witnesses in his ongoing terrorism trial, insisting that there is “no valid charge” against him.
Kanu, who had earlier notified the court of his intention to open his defence and summon witnesses, made a U-turn, declaring that the evidence presented by the prosecution failed to establish any offence against him.
“I have gone through the case files,” Kanu told the court. “There is actually no charge against me. There is no extant law in Nigeria on which the prosecution could base this case. If there is no case, it will be futile to enter any defence.”
The courtroom was already set for his much-anticipated defence, with five seats reserved and tagged “summoned witness,” when Kanu—appearing without legal counsel—announced that he would represent himself.
Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Adegboyega Awomolo, who led the prosecution, reminded the court that the business of the day was for the defendant to open his defence.
But Kanu stood firm, maintaining that he would not proceed because “there is no charge to answer.”
Read Also: Ajudua Drops Supreme Court Motion, Faces EFCC Investigator as $1m Fraud Trial Resumes
Justice James Omotosho, presiding over the matter, paused proceedings to patiently explain the implications of Kanu’s decision. He noted that in criminal trials, a defendant who refuses to present a defence may either rest on the prosecution’s case or file a written address instead.
“I know you are educated,” the judge told Kanu, “but you are not a lawyer. Please, consult experts in criminal law before deciding how to proceed. This is not economics—this is criminal prosecution.”
Justice Omotosho reminded Kanu that the court had earlier dismissed his “no-case submission” and ruled that he had a case to answer.
However, he granted Kanu’s request for an adjournment to enable him file a written address arguing that there is no valid charge against him.
Kanu pleaded, “I need a week to file my written address. If there is no extant law supporting the charge, there cannot be a case. You must please release me or grant me bail.”
Reacting, Awomolo urged the court to consider Kanu’s declaration as a conclusion of his defence. “The defendant has said he will not call witnesses because there is no charge. That means the case has been brought to a close,” the prosecutor argued, asking the court to fix a date for judgment.
But Justice Omotosho disagreed, clarifying that Kanu’s argument that the charge “cannot stand in law” still constitutes a form of defence.
He consequently gave the IPOB leader four days—until October 31—to file his written address, and adjourned further hearing till November 4, 5, and 6, for either adoption of written addresses or continuation of the defence if Kanu changes his mind.
The judge also disclosed that he had earlier considered assigning a pro bono lawyer to represent Kanu after he dismissed his legal team but was rebuffed.
“I am begging you in the name of God Almighty, make proper consultation,” Justice Omotosho advised gently. “Criminal cases are not like every other case.”
