Court To Nnamdi Kanu: Why I Can’t Grant You Bail For Now

Justice Binta Nyako of Federal High Court sitting in Abuja has ruled that the detained Leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra, IPOB, Mazi Nnamdi Kanu case has not begun with substantive hearing since the case was brought before it.

Justice Binta Nyako dismissed the new bail application filed by Nnamdi Kanu lawyer on the ground that the reason given, why Nnamdi Kanu didn’t appear in court after he was earlier granted bail was not satisfactory.

Nnamdi Kanu, who is currently accused and charged with a seven-count charge bordering on terrorism and treasonable felony, had in the new bail application he filed through his team of lawyers led by Chief Mike Ozekhome (SAN), challenged the revocation of the bail the court earlier granted to him.

The Biafra leader asked the court to set aside the order it made on March 28, 2019, which not only issued a bench warrant for his arrest, but also gave FG the nod to try him in absentia.

“The IPOB leader told the court that contrary to FG’s allegation that he jumped bail, he fled for his life after his home town at Afaraukwu Ibeku in Umuahia, Abia State, was invaded by soldiers, which he said led to the death of 28 persons.

“While contending that he was denied a fair hearing before his bail was revoked, Kanu attached eight exhibits that included photographs, as well as an affidavit he deposed from Isreal, after he fled from the country”, PUNCH reports.

Justice Binta Nyako while dismissing the fresh bail application on Tuesday, said she was not satisfied with the reason the IPOB leader gave for his failure to appear in court for the continuation of his trial.

Justice Binta Nyako ruled that from records of the court, Kanu was represented by his lawyer on the day his bail was revoked, likewise his sureties.

“In fact, his sureties told the court that they did not know the whereabouts of the Defendant and even applied to be discharged from the matter.

“Therefore, Defendant was not denied a fair hearing”, the court ruled.

Adding that, although a court could vacate a previous order when confronted with a cogent and verifiable reason, but “in the instant case, I have not been given any, neither have I been given any reason to set aside the order.

“The present application amounts to an abuse of court process for attempting to relitigate an issue already decided by the court.

“If the Defendant is dissatisfied, he has the Appeal Court to go to. This application is accordingly dismissed”, Justice Nyako said.

“The court maintained that Kanu must explain the reason why he breached the previous bail that was given to him, before he could enjoy another favourable discretion from it”, according to Punch Newspaper.

“Until the issue of the absence of the defendant for his trial, with all the bail conditions breached, is determined, the instant application of the defendant for bail will at best be premature and it is refused.

“However, the defendant is at liberty to re-file the application”, Justice Nyako said.

The case has been adjourned till November 14 for mention, to await the outcome of Nnamdi Kanu’s appeal.

https://twitter.com/General_Somto/status/1541733464147468289?t=Ee7mKBmDBdymsBOgE3ICDQ&s=19

https://twitter.com/General_Somto/status/1541723226132316160?t=nZmZqrXDwgibkuBrb_VMxQ&s=19