A Federal High Court in Abuja has ruled against the Federal Government in a major development in the ongoing trial of the detained leader of the proscribed Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Mazi Nnamdi Kanu, rejecting critical evidence presented by the prosecution.
Evidence Rejected Due to Rights Breach
TJ News Nigeria gathered that the trial, presided over by Justice James Omotosho, saw the exclusion of alleged confessional statements made by Kanu in October and November 2015. The decision followed arguments presented by Kanu’s lead counsel, Paul Erokoro (SAN), who challenged the admissibility of the evidence on grounds that the statements were obtained under duress and without legal representation.
Also Read: Court Orders Arrest of Wike-Led FCTA Director, 10 Others Over Alleged Land Fraud
The statements in question were reportedly made during interrogations by operatives of the Department of State Services (DSS). While the court acknowledged that Kanu had failed to conclusively prove duress, it ruled that the absence of his legal counsel during the interrogation constituted a violation of his fundamental rights as enshrined in the Nigerian Constitution.
Justice Omotosho cited Supreme Court precedent requiring that suspects must be interrogated in the presence of legal counsel to ensure the voluntariness of any statement made. Accordingly, he ruled that the statements were inadmissible and upheld the objection from the defence.
“The right to counsel is a fundamental safeguard under the Nigerian Constitution. Any evidence obtained in its absence is constitutionally flawed and cannot stand,” Justice Omotosho ruled.
DSS Witness Introduces Video Evidence
Following the rejection of the written statements, the DSS prosecution witness — identified as PW-3 — continued his testimony and presented a video titled “Interview with Sahara TV,” purportedly showing Nnamdi Kanu making inflammatory remarks.
The court admitted the video into evidence and played it in open session. In the footage, Kanu described Nigeria as a “zoo”, and made several explosive allegations against notable Igbo leaders.
Key Allegations in Video:
- Accused Ike Nwachukwu, a former minister, of murdering Igbo people.
- Claimed Jim Nwobodo, ex-Governor of Anambra State, betrayed Alex Ekwueme, Nigeria’s former Vice President.
- Alleged that Peter Obi, Labour Party’s 2023 presidential candidate, was involved in extrajudicial killings of Igbos and dumped their bodies in rivers.
- Accused Rochas Okorocha, former Imo State Governor, of “Islamising” the state.
- Threatened a civil war scenario if the Biafran agitation was not granted, warning that Nigeria would resemble war-torn Somalia.
TJ News Nigeria learnt that the court took particular note of these comments, especially Kanu’s threat:
“If they do not give us Biafra, there will be nothing living in the zoo; nothing will survive there.”
Cross-Examination: Witness Under Fire
During cross-examination, Erokoro grilled the DSS witness on the authenticity and impact of the statements made by Kanu in the video. The witness admitted that:
- He did not verify any of the claims made by Kanu.
- His assignment was limited to confirming that Kanu granted the interview and made the statements.
- He had no knowledge of whether Kanu had recanted the statements in later interviews.
The defence argued that the prosecution’s failure to confirm the veracity of such serious allegations renders the evidence circumstantial and unreliable.
Trial Adjourned for Continuation
Justice Omotosho subsequently adjourned the trial to June 13, 16, 17, 18, and 19, 2025, for continuation of proceedings.
Background Context
Nnamdi Kanu, a dual citizen of Nigeria and the United Kingdom, was extradited from Kenya under controversial circumstances in 2021. His ongoing trial has drawn national and international attention, particularly over issues related to human rights, due process, and the legality of his arrest and extradition.
The IPOB leader faces multiple charges including treasonable felony, incitement, and terrorism-related offenses.
Key Takeaways
- Federal Government’s evidence rejected due to violation of right to legal representation.
- Video evidence of interview admitted, but veracity of claims unverified.
- Defence scores legal victory on procedural grounds.
- Case continues mid-June with possible ramifications for Nigeria’s national security and human rights obligations.
