Justice James Omotosho of the Federal High Court in Abuja, on Monday, gave Nnamdi Kanu seven days to file his final written address in the ongoing trial on alleged terrorism offences.
Justice Omotosho granted Kanu’s request for a week to file his final written address following his decision not to open his defence after his no-case submission was refused.
Kanu, the leader of the proscribed Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), had earlier sought to call no fewer than 23 witnesses in his defence against the ongoing alleged terrorism offences.
Kanu, in a motion filed on Oct. 21, listed the names of prominent Nigerians and foreigners he intended to call as witnesses to defend himself.
Kanu, in the application he personally signed, informed the court of his plan to call witnesses who were divided into two categories.
The first category, he said, would be those he called “ordinary but material witnesses.”
He further informed the court that his second category of witnesses would be “vital and compellable” and shall be “summoned under Section 232 of the Evidence Act, 2011.”
He prayed the court that, in view of the number of witnesses he intended to call, the court should consider granting a 90-day timeframe to enable him conclude his defence.
The leader of the IPOB, however, disengaged his legal team led by Chief Kanu Agabi, SAN, former Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF) and Minister of Justice on Thursday.
He told the court he was ready to defend himself and the judge adjourned until Friday.
But his commencement of defence could not proceed on Friday, following his complaint that the case file was yet to be handed over to him by his former lawyers and the judge fixed today for the case.
Meanwhile, with the believe that Kanu would open his defence on Monday, the court reserved about five seats, with each labelled “summoned witness.”
When the case was called Chief Adegboyega Awomolo, SAN, announced appearance for the prosecution.
Kanu also announced his name and said he was representing himself.
Awomolo then told the court that the matter was scheduled for the defendant to open his defence.
Responding, Kanu, who earlier sat in the dock, stood up and said he had gone through the case files and found that “there is actually no charge against me.”
Kanu argued that there is no extant law in the country on which the prosecution could premise its case.
“There is no case against me. If there is no case against me, it will be futile for me to enter any defence,” he said.
Justice Omotosho then intervened and took time to explain to the IPOB leader that in a criminal trial, the defendant only has three options after the prosecution has closed its case.
The judge said the first option was for the defendant to make a no-case submission and when overruled, the defendant is then required to enter a defence.
He said where a defendant chose not to open his or her defence or conduct any defence at all, such a defendant can decide to rest on the prosecution’s case.
He said the defendant can then file a written address, to which the prosecution will be required to reply and the court delivers judgment.
After listening to the judge’s explanation, Kanu said: “my position is that there is no charge against me.
“There is no need for me to enter a defence. What I’m saying is that there is no case against me.”
Justice Omotosho reminded Kanu that he had earlier ruled on his no-case submission and held that he had a case to answer.
According to the judge, that ruling still subsists.
Kanu then applied to the court for a week adjournment to enable him file a written address to support why he insisted that no valid charge was pending against him.
He argued that he was subjected to needless trial and detention.
“I need a week to file a written address to the effect that there is no charge against me.
“If there is no extant law in Nigeria on which the charge could stand, there cannot be a case.
“You must please release me today or grant bail,” he said.
Responding, Awomolo said from what the defendant had said and the option he had taken, the court should adjourn for judgment.
“I take it that the defendant said he is not putting in any defence, because there is no valid charge against him.
“I want to submit that this position is conclusive of the defendant’s defence.
“I know that he took a plea to counts against him and he pleaded not guilty.
“We led evidence and he cross-examined our witnesses.
“Now that he said he has no defence, the case has been brought to a close,” the senior lawyer said.
Awomolo, therefore, urged the court to adjourn for judgment right away.
He said that at this stage, there was only one option for the defendant.
According to him, if he (Kanu) takes his objection as his defence, the prosecution will respond and the court will give its judgment subsequently.
The prosecuting lawyer said the option chosen by Kanu implied that he had opted to address the court on points of law as his defence in the case.
In his intervention, Justice Omotosho observed that the defendant was not outrightly saying he had no defence, but that the charge against him cannot be.
“That is also a defence. In that case, he will have to put that down in a written submission that will be served on the prosecution, who will also respond,” the judge said.
The judge then proceeded to advise Kanu to consult experts before he decides on how to proceed henceforth.
Justice Omotosho said: “There is a need for you (Kanu) to consult people, who are knowledgeable in criminal prosecution, to advise you on how to proceed.
“I am begging you in the name of God Almighty, to consult properly. I am inclined to grant you the adjournment you seek.
“I am inclined to give him the opportunity to consult those, who are knowledgeable in criminal law.
“I know you are educated, but you are not a lawyer.
“You need to consult experts in the field. Please make adequate consultation.
“This is not economics. This is criminal prosecution.
“Please, my brother, make adequate consultation.
“Criminal cases are not like every other cases. I took the opportunity to explain to the defendant because he is not a lawyer,” he said.
The judge added that he had a duty to explain to the defendant the consequences of his decision not to enter a defence.
Justice Omotosho said after Kanu sacked his lawyers, he had wanted to refer the case to the Legal Aid Council or any lawyer, who was willing to take the case pro bono, but the defendant refused and said he was going to defend himself.
“Even at that, I still have a duty to explain the consequences of his option to him because he is not a lawyer.
“Please, make consultation,” the judge said.
Justice Omotosho then gave Kanu four days from Monday within which he should file his written address and serve on the prosecution to enable the prosecution file its reply.
The judge adjourned the matter until Nov. 4, Nov. 5 and Nov. 6 for either the adoption of the written addresses or for Kanu to open his defence should he chose to change his mind
