.jpg)
 |
| ARRAIGNED: Mr. Nnamdi Kanu. |
ABUJA—-The Court of Appeal sitting in Abuja, on Monday,
shifted hearing on the appeal that was lodged by the detained leader of the
Indigenous People of Biafra, IPOB, Mr. Nnamdi Kanu, till May 5.
Following
insistence by Kanu’s
A three-man panel of Justices of the appellate court led by
Justice Abdul Aboki adjourned the matter after it was discovered that it was
not listed for hearing in the court’s cause list.
lawyer, Chief Chuks Muoma, SAN, that it was the appellate
court itself that originally fixed April 25 to hear the matter, Justice Aboki,
promised that the court would look into the matter on the next adjourned date.
Kanu, alongside two other pro-Biafra agitators, David
Nwawusi and Benjamin Madubugwu, had gone before the appellate court to
challenge what they termed “strange procedure” adopted in their trial.
Already, the trio who are answering to a six-count treason
charge, has urged the Federal High Court sitting in Abuja to stay further
hearing on the case against them, pending the determination of their
consolidated appeal.
Specifically, they alleged bias against trial Justice John
Tsoho who not only declined to quash the charge against them, but also
permitted the prosecution to shield the identity of eight witnesses billed to
testify in the matter.
The Judge equally refused to discharge and acquit the three
defendants as it was prayed to do under section 351(1) of the Administration
of Criminal Justice Act, 2015.
The defendants are contending before the appellate court
that trial Justice Tsoho erred in law “when having refused the application for
the witnesses of the prosecution to testified behind screens, or masked” on
February 19, 2016, “suddenly varied the said order in the ruling delivered on
March 7, 2016, on a mere oral application by the respondent”
They noted that the variation order was made on the basis of
a mere oral application by the Director of Public Prosecution, DPP, Mr.
Mohammed Diri.
The DPP had informed the court that witnesses scheduled to
testify against Kanu and the others, said they would not appear unless they
were allowed to wear masks or their identities shielded from both lawyers and
people observing the proceeding.
“My lord, this is because they are already receiving threats
from associates of the defendants that they will be dealt with. The witnesses
said they love their lives and requested that their identities be shielded from
people who are coming to witness the proceeding”, Diri added.
He said DSS operatives also billed to testify in the matter,
made similar request on the basis that they are investigating terrorism cases
and would not want their identities exposed.
Sequel to his application, Justice Tsoho gave an order
permitting the witnesses to testify behind a screen.
The judge insisted that the decision did not amount to a
variation of a previous ruling that prohibited the witnesses from appearing in
mask.
The defendants had on February 9, opposed FG’s application
for secret trial, even as they queried the propriety of the court allowing
”masquerades” to testify against them.
Though Justice Tsoho maintained that the order he made on
Monday was in tandem with the ruling of February 9, the defence lawyer, Muoma,
SAN, went on appeal to challenge the revised order for the identities of the
witnesses to be protected.
Muoma, SAN, argued that the trial court had become
functus-officio on the matter, having earlier ruled on the previous application
by the prosecution.
It was his argument that FG ought to have appealed against
that the ruling instead of re-approaching the same court with a similar
application.
He is praying the appellate court to direct the Chief Judge
of the Federal High Court to transfer their case to another Judge for trial.
Nevertheless, FG, in a counter-affidavit it filed before
the appellate court, sought the dismissal of the appeal which it said lacked
merit.
The DPP who endorsed the appeal, argued that the March 7
order of the high court did not amount to a variation of the previous order of
the court.
FG insisted that Kanu and the others were never denied
fair-hearing by Justice Tsoho to warrant re-assignment of the case-file to
another Judge.
Besides, it accused the defendants of attempting to use
frivolous interlocutory appeals to delay their trial.
Kanu who was hitherto the Director of Radio Biafra and
Television, has been in detention since October 14, 2015, when he was arrested
by security operatives upon his arrival to Nigeria from his base in the United
Kingdom.
The defendants were alleged to have committed treasonable
felony, an offence punishable under Section 41(C) of the Criminal Code Act, CAP
C38 Laws of the Federation of Nigeria.
FG alleged that they were the ones managing the affairs of
the IPOB which it described as “an unlawful society”.
Kanu was alleged to have illegally smuggled radio
transmitters into Nigeria, which he used to disseminate “hate broadcasts”,
encouraging the “secession of the Republic ofBiafra”, from Nigeria.
The accused persons however pleaded not guilty to the charge
on January 20, even as the court ordered their remand at Kuje prison in Abuja.
http://www.vanguardngr.com/2016/04/biafra-court-shifts-hearing-kanu-others-appeal-may-5/
Comments