The leader of the proscribed Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Nnamdi Kanu, on Monday, questioned the jurisdiction of the court handling his alleged terrorism case as he appeared before Justice Binta Nyako of the Federal High Court for a resumed hearing. Despite his objections, Justice Nyako adjourned the case indefinitely.
Kanu, who was brought back to Nigeria in June 2021, has been detained and is facing trial for alleged terrorism. His case was put on hold after he verbally requested Justice Nyako to recuse herself from the trial on September 24, 2024, citing a lack of confidence in her handling of the matter. However, the Chief Judge of the Federal High Court, John Tsoho, returned the case to Nyako, insisting that Kanu’s request for her recusal must be made formally through a motion on notice.
Following this, prosecution counsel Adegboyega Awomolo, in a letter dated December 5, 2024, requested the court to fix a date for the trial. In response, Kanu’s defence counsel, Aloy Ejimakor, argued in a December 9 letter that Justice Nyako’s recusal remained valid. Ejimakor also requested that the case be transferred to a Federal High Court in the South-East if no judge in Abuja was willing to preside over it, but this request was not granted.
During Monday’s hearing, Justice Nyako stated that the Chief Judge had not accepted her recusal and had reassigned the case to her. She advised Kanu’s defence team to submit a formal written application if they still sought her withdrawal from the trial.
The prosecution, led by Awomolo, declared readiness to proceed, stating that witnesses were prepared to testify. However, Kanu objected to the proceedings, questioning why he was brought before Justice Nyako again. He dismissed the judge’s statements as meaningless and asserted that he did not recognize her authority over him. He maintained that he was in court only out of respect for the rule of law, reiterating that Justice Nyako had previously recused herself.
Expressing dissatisfaction with the Chief Judge’s decision to return the case to Justice Nyako, Kanu insisted that she was biased and unfit to handle his trial. He criticized the Nigerian judiciary, stating that a poor understanding of legal principles was affecting the country.
The prosecution objected to Kanu’s remarks, urging the court to set a definite trial date and arguing that it was inappropriate for the defendant to insult the judge. However, Justice Nyako, despite Kanu’s objections, ruled to adjourn the case indefinitely.
