Justice James Kolawole Omotosho of the Federal High Court in Abuja has struck out video and written statements obtained from Nnamdi Kanu between October 21-24 and November 4, 2015.
The ruling followed Kanu’s objection during the last hearing on May 28, when he challenged the admissibility of three written statements, alleging they were obtained under duress. This prompted Justice Omotosho to order a trial within trial.
While delivering his ruling on the trial within trial yesterday, Justice Omotosho said he had listened to both counsels and gone through the evidence, noting that the burden of proof was on the prosecution to prove the confession was obtained voluntarily.
He said the defendant did not establish involuntariness during his evidence and observed that the video showed the statement was taken in a cordial environment with no sign of coercion noticed.
“However, this court cannot close its eyes to the fact that the defendant was regularly complaining about the absence of his counsel,” Justice Omotosho stated.
He explained that Section 15 of ACJA provides that where a suspect is arrested without a warrant, his statement must be obtained in the presence of his counsel, and where counsel is not available, in the presence of an officer of the Legal Aid Council of Nigeria or a member of civil society.
“The essence of a video recording of the statement is to prove that the statement was voluntarily obtained in the presence of counsel,” he said, emphasising that security agencies must comply with legal provisions by recording suspects’ statements in the presence of their counsel.
“Section 32 of the constitution provides that any accused person is entitled to legal representation. Though the statement was recorded in video, the fact that the lawyer of the defendant is not available makes the statement inadmissible in evidence.”
“This court is empowered to also expunge the video recordings which had been previously admitted in evidence. Having established that the statement is inadmissible, it holds to law that the video recordings are also not admissible.”
Justice Omotosho then issued his orders: “1. The statement of the defendant dated 21-24 October and November 4, 2015, are inadmissible in evidence. 2. The video recordings of the statement are also declared inadmissible and hereby marked rejected.”
Having delivered the ruling on the trial within trial, Justice Omotosho addressed another matter, speaking sternly about people who put out court proceedings on the internet while court is still sitting, including quoting verbatim what the judge says and what is being played as evidence.
Singling out Mrs Favour Kanu, Nnamdi Kanu’s sister-in-law, Justice Omotosho accused her of streaming court proceedings in real time, posting proceedings on social media word-for-word and asking people to comment on ongoing proceedings.
Previously, Justice Omotosho had warned Mrs Kanu about her courtroom conduct after she was caught filming and broadcasting court proceedings live, leading to her being banned from the courtroom for three sittings.
When asked to stand up and confirm whether the allegations were true, Mrs Kanu admitted she had streamed the court proceedings.
Justice Omotosho then banned Mrs Favour Kanu from ever coming to the trial and barred her from accessing the court premises unless she had a matter in court. He warned that henceforth he would be sending people to Kuje Prison for contempt in the face of the court.
After the ruling on the trial within trial, the hearing continued with the third prosecution witness, Mr. CCC, a DSS officer who was part of the investigation team on Nnamdi Kanu.
The witness told the court about an interview Kanu granted to Sahara Reporters in 2014, where he allegedly made serious threats against Nigeria.
The lawyer representing the Federal Government, Suraj Saida, presented a CD containing the Sahara Reporters’ interview with Kanu, which the judge admitted as evidence and played in court.
In the video, when asked about the upcoming National Conference and whether he was satisfied with the Igbo delegation, Kanu replied that he had no expectations from the conference. He warned Igbo leaders that if they failed to represent their people properly, they should not return to the Southeast.
“If they underestimate us, what is happening in Somalia will be child’s play compared to what will happen here,” Kanu said.
He also stated that he would pursue Biafra through both peaceful and violent means: “If they give us Biafra peacefully, that’s wonderful. But if they want war, I can assure you that nothing will be left alive in the zoo they call a country.”
In the same video, Kanu mentioned retired army general Ike Nwachukwu, then Imo State Governor Rochas Okorocha, and Peter Obi, claiming that Hausa-Fulani people were installing governors in the Southeast to do their bidding.
After the video was played, the prosecution ended its examination-in-chief of the witness.
During cross-examination, Nnamdi Kanu’s lawyer, Paul Erokoro (SAN), asked whether Kanu or his supporters killed Ike Nwachukwu, Rochas Okorocha, or Peter Obi after they returned from the National Conference. The witness replied that, to the best of his knowledge, no one was killed.
Erokoro also asked if the witness remembered when President Muhammadu Buhari once said that if the 2015 election was rigged, “the dog and the baboon will be soaked in blood.” Mr. CCC said he had an idea that Buhari said something like that.
The cross-examination ended, and Mr. CCC was discharged from the witness stand.
Justice Omotosho then adjourned the case to June 13, 16, 18, and 19, 2025, for continuation.
Follow the AkweyaTV channel on WhatsApp: https://whatsapp.com/channel/0029Va7m7dvJuyA7h5XMc22i
