By Ikechukwu Nnochiri
ABUJA– The detained leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra, IPOB, Nnamdi Kanu, on Wednesday, filed a fresh motion before the Abuja Division of the Court of Appeal.
In the process he signed by himself, Kanu, prayed the appellate court to stay proceedings of the Federal High Court in Abuja which had slated November 20 to deliver judgement on the seven-count terrorism charge the Federal Government preferred against him.
The embattled IPOB leader predicated his application on the fact that he had appealed against a ruling that trial Jistice James Omotosho delivered against him on September 26.
He noted that the trial court had in the said ruling, dismissed a no-case-submission he filed to challenge the legal competence of the charge and the jurisdiction of the court to try him.
Kanu, who had contended that the totality of evidence that was tendered by the prosecution, failed to establish a prima-facie case against him, told the appellate court that instead of discharging and acquitting him, the trial judge ordered him to open his defence to the charge.
He argued that it was wrong for the high court to dismiss his application without going through the issues he raised about the validity of the charge and its jurisdiction to entertain it.
According to Kanu, the charge against him was based on the Terrorism Prevention and Prohibition Act 2013, which he said had since been repealed.
He insisted that the constitutional issue of jurisdiction he raised against his trial, was ignored by the trial judge.
More so, Kanu told the appellate court that trial Jistice Omotosho did not evaluate the evidence of the five prosecution witnesses as well as their answers during cross examination, to determine whether the proof of evidence adduced before the court, was discredited.
Kanu told the appellate court that his intention was to produce 23 witnesses after the issue of jurisdiction had been determined.
He alleged that the trial court insisted it would only decide on the issue in its final judgement on the case.
The Appellate averred that the trial judge foreclosed his right to defend himself from the charge, while refusing to rule on his objections to the validity of some of the counts in the charge.
Kanu added that if his request to stop the judgement delivery was not granted by the Court of Appeal, he may be unlawfully convicted and sentenced to jail.
Besides, he argued that should the trial court proceed with its plan to deliver the scheduled judgement, his appeal against the dismissal of his no-case-submission would become a mere academic exercise, saying it would equally foist a fait accompli on the Court of Appeal.
He insisted that neither the trial court nor himself would be prejudiced if the application is granted.
In a 13- paragraph affidavit he filed in support of the motion, Kanu raised the issue of disobedience to Supreme Court order on the validity of count 7 in the charge against him, as well as the failure to apply mandatory test under section 303 of Administration of Criminal Justice Act 2015 ACJA.
It was his position that the Supreme Court made it clear that count 7 of the charge was no longer an offence in Nigeria, same having been repealed.
In the affidavit he personally deposed to, Kanu said his pending appeal raised substantial recondite and constitutional issues of law.
He added that counts 1 to 6 of the charge were predicated on a repealed and non-existent statute, which he said was an indication that he had no valid charge pending against him.
Meanwhile, the appellate court had yet to fix a date for the motion to be heard.
It will be recalled that Kanu, who has been in custody of the Department of State Services, DSS, since 2021, had on Tuesday, equally filed a motion for the trial court to suspend its scheduled judgement on FG’s terrorism charge against him.
Kanu, who is defending himself after he disengaged his team of lawyers, specifically applied for: “An order arresting the delivery of judgment in Charge No: FHC/ABJ/CR/383/2015, scheduled for the 20th day of November 2025, on the ground that the proceedings were conducted under a repealed and non-existent statute and in disobedience to the Supreme Court’s directive contrary to Section 287(1) CFRN 1999.
“A declaration that by virtue of Section 287(1) CFRN, the trial court was constitutionally bound to give effect to the Supreme Court’s finding that Count 15 (now Count 7) ‘does not exist in law,’ and the failure renders all subsequent proceedings null and void.
“A declaration that the Court’s failure to take judicial notice of the repeal of the 2013 Terrorism Act, contrary to Section 122 Evidence Act 2011, vitiates all steps taken thereunder.
“A declaration that by virtue of Section 76(1)(a)(ill) of the Terrorism (Prevention and Prohibition) Act 2022, the Federal High Court lacked jurisdiction to try the Defendant in the absence of proof that the alleged conduct constituted an offence under Kenyan law or of any Kenyan judicial validation or extradition order.
“A declaration that the plea purportedly taken on 29 March 2028 under a repealed and non-existent statute and in violation of Section 220 ACJA 2015, is void and incapable of conferring jurisdiction.
“That forged materials amount to constructive denial of fair hearing under Sectica 36(6) CFRN.”
“As well as: “An order setting aside all proceedings and orders made by Hon. Justice Omotosho in Charge No. FEC/ABJ/CR/383/2015, for want of jurisdiction and violation of constitutional supremacy.”
The post Alleged Terrorism: Nnamdi Kanu asks Appeal Court to stop FHC’s judgement appeared first on Vanguard News.
