Court gives Nnamdi Kanu final chance to defend himself

A federal high court in Abuja has adjourned the trial of Nnamdi Kanu, leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), after he again refused to open his defence in the terrorism case filed against him.

At the court session on Tuesday, James Omotosho, the presiding judge, warned Kanu that he has one final opportunity to open his defence on November 5 or risk forfeiting his right to do so.

On October 23, Kanu had dismissed his legal team and opted to represent himself.

When the case came up on October 27, he told the court he had reviewed his case file and found “no charge” against him.

Omotosho had cautioned the defendant that refusing to enter a defence after a no-case submission had been heard and dismissed was “very dangerous”, noting that it was the court’s duty to ensure fairness for all parties.

He advised Kanu to consult experienced criminal lawyers to understand the implications of his decision.

At the resumed hearing on November 4, the judge recapped the proceedings to date before inviting Kanu to speak.

Kanu, however, insisted that there was no valid charge against him and declared his continued detention by the Department of State Services (DSS) illegal.

He accused the court of violating a supreme court judgment that denounced his extraordinary rendition from Kenya and demanded an immediate discharge.

When reminded that the same supreme court had remitted his case to the federal high court for trial, Kanu maintained that the terrorism charges against him were invalid and unconstitutional.

Citing Section 36(12) of the 1999 Constitution, he argued that there was no written law establishing terrorism as an offence in Nigeria.

“In Nigeria today, the constitution is the supreme law; there is no provision for terrorism offence in the constitution. There is no valid charge against me. I will not go back to any detention today,” Kanu said.

“Terrorism Prevention and Prohibition Act has been repealed. I cannot put in defence under a repealed law. I won’t do that.

“Tell any lawyer to show me the valid charge. I appeal to you to please take judicial notice of the repeal of the terrorism charges. I am not ready to go back to detention today unless I am shown the valid charge against me.

“I cannot be tried under a law that has been repealed. A law that is not written in our constitution. Prosecuting me under a repealed law is a violation of my fundamental right.”

Responding, Adegboyega Awomolo, counsel for the prosecution, said all the issues raised by Kanu were already addressed in the charges to which he had entered a plea.

He told the court that Kanu had served the prosecution a document purportedly supporting his claim of no valid charge, describing it as “useless” because it was neither signed nor stamped.

Omotosho ruled that the motion filed by Kanu and the prosecution’s response would be addressed in the court’s final written judgment.

The judge appealed to Kanu “in the name of Almighty God” to enter his defence, urging him to seek legal advice on the validity of the law under which he was charged.

He also said it was important for Kanu or any witness to give oral evidence under oath about his extraordinary rendition rather than relying solely on affidavits.

Kanu, however, accused the court of trying to “stampede” him into entering a defence and insisted, in a raised voice, that he would not return to detention.

At this point, Awomolo remarked that the trial judge should “stop acting like a bishop pleading with the defendant to enter his defence”.

Omotosho subsequently adjourned the case to November 5, 2025, for Kanu to open his defence or have it deemed waived.