Court rejects FG’s evidence against Nnamdi Kanu over lack of legal representation during interrogation

A federal high court in Abuja has rejected the evidence sought to be tendered by the federal government in the ongoing trial of Nnamdi Kanu, leader of the proscribed Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB).

The federal government, through its third witness, an officer of the Department of State Services (DSS), has sought to tender video and documentary evidence which are the alleged confessional statements made by the defendant.

However, Kanu, through his counsel, Paul Erokoro, had objected to the admissibility of the evidence on the grounds that the statements were made under duress.

The court on Wednesday had ordered a trial-within-a-trial to ascertain the voluntariness or involuntariness of the statements.

In his ruling on the trial-within-a-trial on Thursday, James Omotosho, the presiding judge, stated that while Kanu failed to prove his statements were made involuntarily and the video evidence showed no signs of coercion, the court could not overlook his repeated complaints about being interrogated without legal representation.

The judge held that the supreme court had ruled that in extracting an extrajudicial statement from a suspect, the presence of his lawyer is mandatory.

He said security agencies must comply with the relevant laws which mandate the presence of a defendant’s lawyer, stressing that it is “tied to the fundamental right” of every Nigerian.

“The statements are inadmissible in light of this omission by the prosecution,” Omotosho held.

“The objection of the defendant’s counsel is upheld. The statements of October 23, 2015, and November 2015, earlier admitted in evidence, are rejected.”

FG TENDERS FRESH EVIDENCE

After the ruling, the prosecution witness (PW-3) was called to continue with his evidence-in-chief.

The witness, CCC, while being led in evidence by prosecuting lawyer Suraj Saida, identified a disc titled “Interview with Sahara TV”.

The video, stored on a compact disc, was admitted by the court in evidence and later played.

In the video, Kanu was heard calling Nigeria a “zoo”, making allegations against some prominent Igbo figures and threatening to deal with them.

Kanu accused Ike Nwachukwu, former minister of foreign affairs, of killing Igbos.

He accused Jim Nwobodo, former Anambra governor, of betraying Alex Ekweme, a fellow Igbo man.

He equally accused Peter Obi, presidential candidate of the Labour Party (LP) in the 2023 elections, of killing some Igbos and having their corpses dumped in a river.

The IPOB leader also accused Rochas Okorocha, former governor of Imo state, of single-handedly Islamising the state.

Also in the video, Kanu was heard threatening violence if his Biafra objective was not achieved.

He said if Biafra was not granted, what happened in Somalia would be like a child’s play compared to what would befall Nigeria, which he referred to as a zoo.

“If they do not give us Biafra, there will be nothing living in the zoo; nothing will survive there,” he said in the video.

“I do not see Biafra happening peacefully. There is no freedom out of a peaceful process.”

Kanu said he welcomed the attack on Enugu state’s government house, adding that he would support anything that could overthrow the existing corrupt establishment.

While being cross-examined by Erokoro, the witness said he did not investigate the veracity of the allegations made by Kanu against the named prominent Igbo indigenes.

He said his assignment was only to ascertain from Kanu if he actually granted the interview, which he said the defendant confirmed.

He also denied knowing if Kanu backtracked from his statements in subsequent videos he made.

The judge then adjourned the matter until June 13, 16, 17, 18, and 19 for the continuation of the trial.

KANU’S SISTER-IN-LAW BARRED FROM TRIAL

The judge also issued an order barring Favour Kanu, the defendant’s sister-in-law, from attending all future proceedings.

The judge called out Favour and demanded to know whether she was the one responsible for the unlawful live coverage of the court and streaming the proceedings on social media, to which she admitted responsibility.

Having been warned three times to desist from the act, Omotosho ordered her out of the court, adding that she must not be seen within the court premises unless she has a case in court.

Omotosho warned that henceforth, he would be sending people to Kuje prison for contempt of court.