On Monday, Nnamdi Kanu, leader of the proscribed Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), challenged the jurisdiction of his alleged terrorism case during his appearance before Justice Binta Nyako of the Federal High Court for the continuation of his long-running trial.
Kanu argued that Justice Nyako had no jurisdiction over his case, but the judge adjourned the matter indefinitely.
Kanu, who was brought back to Nigeria in June 2021, has been detained and charged with alleged terrorism.
Read Also: How My Father Died After Visit To Nnamdi Kanu In DSS Custody – Iwuanyanwu’s Son
His trial had been delayed after Justice Nyako recused herself on September 24, 2024, following Kanu’s oral request, where he expressed a lack of confidence in her ability to fairly oversee his case.
However, the Chief Judge of the Federal High Court, John Tsoho, returned the case to Nyako, stating that Kanu’s request for her recusal needed to be formally filed through a motion.
In response, on December 5, 2024, the prosecution counsel, Adegboyega Awomolo, wrote to the Deputy Chief Registrar requesting a date to begin the trial.
The defense, led by Aloy Ejimakor, opposed this and maintained that the judge’s recusal still stood, requesting that the case be transferred to a Federal High Court in the South-East if no judge in Abuja was willing to hear it. This request was denied.
At the resumed hearing on February 10, 2025, Justice Nyako explained that the Chief Judge had not accepted her recusal and had referred the case back to her.
She asked the defense team, led by Ejimakor, to submit a written application if they still wished to pursue the recusal.
Prosecution counsel Awomolo stated they were prepared for trial, with witnesses ready.
However, Kanu questioned why he was being brought before Justice Nyako, stating that her statements held no meaning for him.
He reiterated that he did not recognize the court’s authority over him, emphasizing that he was only in court out of respect for the rule of law.
He expressed dissatisfaction with the Chief Judge’s decision to return the case to Nyako and insisted that the prosecution should not be allowed to continue with his case.
Kanu further claimed that Justice Nyako was biased and unfit to preside over his trial, accusing the court’s mismanagement of affecting Nigeria’s judicial system.
The prosecution objected to Kanu’s remarks, urging the court to set a clear hearing date, and stated that it was improper for Kanu to insult the court.
Despite Kanu’s objections, Justice Nyako adjourned the case indefinitely.
https://whatsapp.com/channel/0029VaihFajBadmT29ufud2Z
