The leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) Mazi Nnamdi Kanu, has abandoned his earlier plan to call witnesses in his defence in the ongoing trial for alleged terrorism offences.
Kanu told Justice James Omotosho of the Federal High Court in Abuja, Monday, that he has realised that there was no valid charge against him and that evidence led so far have not established any case against him to require that he enters a defence.
The court had on October 24 adjourned till October 27 for Kanu to open his defence. Kanu had written the court, indicating his intention to call witnesses and applied for witness summons.
Believing that Kanu would open his defence on Monday, the court reserved about five seats, with each labelled “summoned witness.”
When the case was called Adegboyega Awomolo (SAN) announced appearance, along with some other lawyers, for the prosecution.
Kanu also announced his name and said he was representing himself, following which Awomolo reminded the court that the business of the day was 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, adding:
“There is no case against me. If there is no case against me, it will be futile for me to enter any defence.”
At that point Justice James Omotosho intervened and took time to explain to the defendant that in a criminal trial, the defendant only has three options after the prosecution has closed its case.
Justice Omotosho 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/her defence or conduct any defence at all, such a defendant can decide to rest on the prosecution’s case, and 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.”
The judge then reminded him that he had earlier ruled on Kanu’s no-case submission and held that he has a case to answer. The judge said 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, arguing that he was subjected to needless trial and detention.
He said: “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.”
Responding, Awomolo said from what the defendant has said and the option he has taken, the court should adjourn for judgment.
Awomolo said: “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,” Awomolo said and urged the court to adjourn for judgment right away.
Awomolo noted that at this stage, there is only one option for the defendant, adding that 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 implies that he has opted to address the court on point of law as his defence in the case.
In his intervention, Justice Omotosho noted that the defendant is not outrightly saying he has no defence, but that the charge against me cannot be.
He added: “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 then proceeded to advise Kanu to consult experts before he decides on how to proceed henceforth.
Justice Omotosho said: “There is need for you (Kanu) to consultant people, who are knowledgeable in criminal prosecution to advise you on how to proceed.
“I am beginning 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 has 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.
The judge 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 it’s reply.
He adjourned till November 4, 5 and 6 for either the adoption of the written addresses or for Kanu to open his defence should he chose to change his mind.
