Leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Nnamdi Kanu, on Monday informed the Federal High Court in Abuja that he would no longer call witnesses in his ongoing terrorism trial, insisting there was no valid charge against him.
Kanu said the prosecution had failed to establish any case that would require him to enter a defence. He, therefore, asked the court to release him or, alternatively, grant him bail.
Kanu’s Sudden Change of Strategy
The court had earlier adjourned the matter on October 24 for Kanu to open his defence. Ahead of Monday’s session, the IPOB leader had written to the court, expressing his intention to call witnesses and requesting witness summons. In anticipation, five seats were reserved in the courtroom, each labeled “summoned witness.”
When the case was called, lead prosecution counsel, Adegboyega Awomolo (SAN), appeared with his legal team, while Kanu announced that he would represent himself. Awomolo then reminded the court that the purpose of the day’s sitting was for the defendant to open his defence.
Standing in the dock, Kanu told the court that after carefully reviewing the case files, he discovered “there is actually no charge against me.” He added that the prosecution had failed to cite any existing Nigerian law under which his trial could stand.
“There is no case against me,” Kanu declared. “If there is no case against me, it will be futile to enter any defence.”
At this point, the presiding judge, Justice James Omotosho, intervened to clarify the options available to a defendant once the prosecution closes its case. He explained that a defendant could make a no-case submission, and if overruled, proceed to open a defence. Alternatively, the defendant could rest on the prosecution’s evidence and file a written address, after which the court would deliver judgment.
Justice Omotosho reminded Kanu that his earlier no-case submission had already been dismissed and that the ruling remained valid.
Despite the clarification, Kanu maintained his position, arguing that the charges were unfounded and that the court should not compel him to defend himself against non-existent offences.
“My position remains that there is no charge against me. There is no law in Nigeria that supports these allegations. Therefore, there is no need to enter any defence,” he said.
Kanu Seeks Time to File Written Address
Kanu then asked the court to grant him one week to prepare and file a written address explaining why he believes there are no valid charges pending against him. He also pleaded for his release or bail pending the court’s final decision.
“I need one week to file a written address to the effect that there is no charge against me. If the charge cannot stand on any extant law in Nigeria, then this entire trial is unnecessary,” he argued. “You should please release me today or grant me bail.”
Prosecution Urges Court to Proceed to Judgment
In response, Awomolo said Kanu’s statement indicated that he had opted not to present any defence, adding that the prosecution had already led evidence and the defendant had cross-examined witnesses.
“I take it that the defendant has chosen not to call any witness because he insists there is no valid charge against him,” Awomolo said. “This, in essence, concludes the defendant’s defence. Since he has rested his case, we urge the court to adjourn for judgment.”
The senior lawyer maintained that Kanu’s decision implied he would rely on points of law rather than factual defence and that the case had effectively reached its closing stage.
Judge Cautions Kanu to Seek Legal Guidance
Justice Omotosho, however, clarified that Kanu was not entirely declining to defend himself but was asserting that the charges were legally unsustainable. He said this also amounted to a form of defence, which must be presented in writing for the prosecution to respond.
He advised Kanu to seek professional legal advice before proceeding further, emphasizing the seriousness of criminal proceedings.
“There is a need for you to consult people who are knowledgeable in criminal prosecution,” the judge cautioned. “I am begging you, in the name of God Almighty, to seek proper consultation. I will grant you the adjournment you requested.”
The judge noted that while Kanu is educated, he is not a lawyer and might not fully grasp the legal implications of his actions. “This is not economics. This is a criminal prosecution,” he added. “Please, my brother, make adequate consultation. Criminal cases are not like every other case.”
Justice Omotosho further explained that he had earlier considered assigning the case to the Legal Aid Council or appointing a lawyer to represent Kanu pro bono after he dismissed his legal team, but the defendant insisted on defending himself.
“Even then, I still have a duty to explain the consequences of his decision because he is not a lawyer,” the judge said.
After hearing both sides, Justice Omotosho granted Kanu’s request for time to file his written address. The court directed that the document be served on the prosecution before the next sitting.
The judge adjourned the case until November 4, 5, and 6, for the adoption of written addresses or for Kanu to open his defence should he decide to change his mind.
