Reports Indicate CJ Rejects Nnamdi Kanu’s Plea, Nyako Continues

Chief Judge of Federal High Court in Nigeria, Justice John Terhemba Tsoho has rejected the verbal plea by the detained Indigenous People of Biafra, IPOB leader, Nnamdi Kanu for the trial judge in the case, Justice Binta Nyako to withdraw being the judge over the lawsuits.

The rejection by the Chief Judge was confirmed by Nnamdi Kanu’s lawyer, Aloy Ejimakor, according to SaharaReporters.

According to the News media, “SaharaReporters, gathered that Justice Tsoho returned Nnamdi Kanu’s case file to her to handle, saying two other judges were previously recused from the case.

Justice Tsoho stated that Kanu’s case was reassigned to Justice Nyako due to its prolonged nature, dating back to 2015. Given that Justice Nyako had handled the case for the most part, she was deemed the most suitable judge to see it through to its conclusion.

However, the Chief Judge directed that if at the next hearing of the case, Kanu still insists on recusing Justice Nyako, he must file a written motion with an affidavit, stating all the grounds for requesting the recusal.

When contacted, Kanu’s Special Lawyer, Barrister Aloy Ejimakor, who confirmed the development to SaharaReporters on Friday, said, “Yes, it is true. We are awaiting a hearing notice to that effect from the Federal High Court.”

Justice Nyako earlier recused herself from the case following an oral application by Kanu and his lawyer, Aloy Ejimakor. Kanu had expressed loss of confidence in Justice Nyako, accusing her of disregarding Supreme Court orders”. 

On the other hand, Premium Times reported that; “Binta Nyako, has re-accepted the treasonable felony case involving Nnamdi Kanu, the detained leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), after withdrawing from it last month, PREMIUM TIMES has learnt.

Court sources, who have been briefed on the matter, told Premium Times that Mrs Nyako may resume sitting on the matter anytime soon, barring any unforeseen developments.

This comes less than three weeks after Mr Kanu, who has been facing charges arising from his separatist activities for secession of a Republic of Biafra from Nigeria since 2015, pressured Mrs Nyako to recuse herself from the nine-year-old case.

The 24 September proceedings took a dramatic turn when Mr Kanu defied the norm of courtroom decorum to break in on a rambling back-and-forth argument between the bar and the bench”.

We had reported in September last month that Justice Binta Nyako of Federal High Court sitting in Abuja have withdrawn from the case of  detained Biafra Leader, Nnamdi Kanu after the trial could not commence on Tuesday following the Biafra Leader’s personal confrontation with the judge for the second time this year.

Nnamdi Kanu cited Nigeria Supreme Court rulings and sections of the Nigeria laws to insist that the West Africa country lacks the legal status to prosecute him for offences he allegedly committed in England, United Kingdom.

According to Nnamdi Kanu, the nine count charges were offences he allegedly committed while he was in the United Kingdom but the Federal Government of Nigeria has been playing smart with the case by thus always switching the locations he was when the alleged crimes were committed.

Nnamdi Kanu said, before, the Federal Government said he committed the offences when he was in England but after presenting his defence inline with previous Supreme Court rulings and some sections of the Nigeria laws, the government changed the location to Nigeria.

Nnamdi Kanu said, looking at the impartiality of the trial Judge, Justice Binta Nyako, he cannot continue with the shenanigans of the Federal Government and the Court, insisting, it is Nigeria law that says the court can’t try him because the alleged offences were not committed when he was in Nigeria.

Nnamdi Kanu said he has already spent four years in the detention facility of the Department of State Services, DSS, and if he spend another one year in detention will not kill him waiting for the Chief Judge of the Federal Capital Territory, FCT to reassign the case to another judge.

Insisting, what matters is justice. And the low court must obeyed all the decisions of the Nigeria Supreme Court of Justice and stop obeying barely the ones that are against him while ignoring the ones that favoured him.

Nnamdi Kanu said the persecution of Igbo people will stop with him. Adding, he’s a freedom fighter only fighting against the continuous persecution of his people.

Details of the Court proceedings as reported by Punch Newspaper reads thus: “At the resumed hearing in the trial of the leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra, Nnamdi Kanu, at the Federal High Court in Abuja on Tuesday, Justice Binta Nyako, said she was going to recuse herself from the trial.

Recuse, as defined by the Law.com dictionary, means to refuse to be a judge (or for a judge to agree to a request by one of the parties to step aside) in a lawsuit or appeal because of a conflict of interest or other good reason (acquaintanceship with one of the parties, for example). It also applies to a judge or prosecutor being removed.

Nyako’s response to recuse herself from the trial followed Kanu’s request in the open court that the trial judge recuse herself from his trial since she has refused to obey the orders of the Supreme Court.

Kanu is being prosecuted by the Federal Government on a seven-count bordering on terrorism.

Kanu stated that he had lost confidence in the court and that the trial judge should recuse herself from his trial.

Meanwhile, Justice Nyako replied that she would be happy to do just that. She added that she would be sending Kanu’s case file back to the chief judge for it to be reassigned.

Meanwhile, Kanu ordered his counsel, Alloy Ejimakor, to sit down while he was trying to persuade the court to suspend the trial on the basis that his client was denied the opportunity to prepare his defence.

Kanu referred to the Supreme Court judgement where alleged bias against the judge was raised.

“Sit down! I say you should sit down!” Kanu had yelled at his lawyer.

Speaking further, he said, “My lord, I have no confidence in this court any more, and I ask you to recuse yourself because you did not abide by the decision of the Supreme Court.

“I can understand it, if the DSS refuses to obey a court order, but for this court to refuse to obey an order of the Supreme Court is regrettable.

“I am asking you to recuse yourself from this case.”

The prosecution counsel, Adegboyega Awomolo, (SAN), however, tried to urge Justice Nyako to proceed with the trial, but she responded that she had been minded to recuse herself from the case.

“I hereby recuse myself and remit the case file back to the Chief Judge,” she declared.

We had reported in May this year that, in a rare case in the history of legal proceedings in the world, Nnamdi Kanu, the detained Leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra, IPOB helped himself at the Federal High Court sitting in Abuja on Monday and played the role of a lawyer with full energy and vibrant command of words with fearless loud voice defended himself  with face to face confrontation with the trial judge, Justice Binta Nyako and the Federal Government Prosecution counsel, Adegboyega Awomolo.

Nnamdi Kanu while confronting the Judge, asked Justice Binta Nyako why could she be conducting his trial contrary to the provisions of the laws of Nigeria and International treaties which Nigeria is signatory to.

A voice of Justice Binta Nyako could be heard in the video posted online trying to respond to Nnamdi Kanu queries but the commanding voice and continuous marshaling of words with historical citation of facts and sections of the laws by Nnamdi Kanu suppressed the voice of the judge.

The video shows Nnamdi Kanu speaking at a corridor in front of a mini office inside the court room where Justice Binta Nyako was inside  listening and tried to respond to the detained Biafra leader’s confrontations and allegations of injustice and intimidation.

Nnamdi Kanu, according to BBC, also confronted the Federal Government prosecution lawyer, Adegboyega Awomolo and called him a terrorist.

Kanu pointed at FG lawyer, Adegboyega Awomolo and said in quote thus: “You are a terrorist. You no get power to try me.”

Nnamdi Kanu actions and reactions began when the trial judge, Justice Binta Nyako denied him bail or refused to grant him house arrest. The court ruling forced Nnamdi Kanu to raise his hand and insisted of addressing the court himself.

Nnamdi Kanu on Monday after the Federal High Court sitting in Abuja dismissed his fresh bail application for him to be removed from the Department of State Service (DSS), while speaking with news reporters, said that Nigerian court seeking to try him is committing an act of terrorism.

Nnamdi Kanu condemned Nigeria government for allegedly violating the provisions of Terrorism Prevention and Prohibition Act by seeking to try him.

Justice Binta Nyako had on Monday dismissed Kanu’s fresh application seeking the restoration of his revoked bail and his removal from the DSS custody to a house arrest or prison custody.

Justice Nyako, dismissed the application for lacking in merit, and ruled that Kanu had brought the same application before the court.

Reacting to the claim that the Supreme Court’s ruling in 2023 indicating that Kanu did not jump bail, Justice Nyako said that she found, as a fact, that the IPOB leader jumped the bail granted to him earlier, and that he escaped out of Nigeria.

Justice Nyako in her ruling said that the sureties who stood for Kanu in the earlier bail, had applied to be discharged, and had been discharged on the ground that they could not locate Kanu and did not know his whereabouts.

Justice Binta Nyako stated further that the only option left for Kanu was to go to the Court of Appeal and should proceed to the appellate court to exercise his right of appeal.

The judge overruled the claim of Kanu’s lead counsel, that the Supreme Court held that the earlier bail granted him, ought not to have been revoked.

According to the judge, she has perused the Supreme Court judgment copy, and did not see the claim by Kanu’s lawyer.

Irked by the ruling, Kanu said that Section 2(3)(f) of Terrorism Prevention and Prohibition Act provided that any court seeking to try him was committing an act of terrorism.

Kanu insisted that he did not jump bail earlier granted to him and that no Nigerian court could try him.

“Terrorism Prohibition Act says I cannot be tried in Nigeria. I can never be tried in any court of law in Nigeria. That is what the law says.

Anybody coming to try me is a terrorist. That is what the law says. Section 2(3)(f) of Terrorism Prevention and Prohibition Act says that any court trying to try me is committing an act of terrorism. 

You cannot violate a treaty that Nigeria entered into and come to try that person. It is not done anywhere in the world. That is why there is all these ridiculous delays.

The Supreme Court said that I did not jump bail. My home was invaded. They came to kill me and I survived. They came to Kenya to kidnap me, brought me back to this country and seeking to try me, which the law says cannot happen. 

You cannot violate a treaty that Nigeria entered into and hope to stand on that illegality to conduct a trial. It is not done anywhere in the world. No exception whatsoever. 

Section 12 of the constitution (Nigeria) says that any treaty ratified by Nigeria becomes a law. You cannot change it. It doesn’t matter what they do. All these shenanigans is just pure rubbish. I believe in fairness and justice”, Nnamdi Kanu stated in quote.