Nnamdi Kanu: Cross-examination of principal witness begins in court.
The trial of Nnamdi Kanu, the controversial leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), has continued before Justice James Omotosho of the Federal High Court in Abuja, with the cross-examination of Principal Witness 1.
At the resumed hearing, the judge granted the federal government’s request for witnesses to testify behind screens.
While the prosecuting counsel is Adegboyega Awomolo (SAN), former Attorney General of the Federation Kanu Agabi led the defence team, with a Department of State Services employee, identified just as AAA, appearing as PW1.
AAA was asked if he was the officer who conducted the interrogation in the footage shown in court. He explained that there were five officers in the room, including himself.
He stated that his role in the inquiry was restricted to arresting the defendant, taking his statement, and conveying him to Abuja for further investigation.
Among the objects submitted in court, he was questioned if there was anything that appeared objectionable. AAA said no.
He was questioned if he had examined any of the items retrieved from him. AAA claimed he merely analysed his phone.
He was questioned if the phone was in evidence. He answered in the affirmative. He was asked if there was any analysis in evidence. He responded in the negative because they deemed it irrelevant to the case.
Responding: “Do you agree that in the 10 years since you confiscated these items, many of them have lost their use?” AAA said “yes”.
He was asked if there was any record of the items he claimed the DSS returned to the defendant. He said yes, but he did not personally retain the records.
He was asked if he found any weapons on the lady with Kanu. He said no.
He was asked if he saw the lady’s firm as helping terrorism. “No” was his response.
“Did you find any instrument of terrorism on the lady?” “No,” he replied. “Did you find any instrument of terrorism on the defendant?” “No,” he replied.
“Did you contact anybody whom the defendant mentioned as working with him?” AAA stated that the defendant made no mention of any names.
“Do you know if there are other people standing terrorism trial with the defendant in this case?” AAA said no.
“I put it to you that there’s no other person in the whole of Nigeria who is standing terrorism trial for Biafra agitation except the defendant,” Agabi claimed. And AAA stated that he was aware that several persons had previously stood trial alongside him, but he is unaware of the current status of those proceedings.
AAA also stated that he has read on social media and in publications that the defendants have followers, such as Simon Ekpa, who continue the agitation.
He stated that the DSS is in the process of extraditing Simon Ekpa to Nigeria to face charges.
“Is the defendant charged with damaging anybody’s property?” AAA said, “Maybe not personally and virtually”.
“How virtually?” AAA stated there are social media posts where the defendant was instigating violence.
“Do you know one person who carried out any act of violence because the defendant incited him?” “I don’t know,” AAA replied.
“Do you remember that the defendant said there is corruption, youth unemployment, and a lack of development in Nigeria?” AAA said he cannot remember, but he remembers the defendant calling Nigeria a Zoo.
Asked whether he remembered that the defendant said IPOB was not an armed group and does not give armed training to its members, he said he remembers the defendant saying IPOB does not bear arms.
“There have been killings in Kaduna, Zamfara, Benue, Plateau, and other parts of the north. “Are those killings motivated by a desire for separation?” AAA responded, “To the best of my knowledge, no.”
“Do you agree that our highways are not safe to some extent?” AAA answered, “To a larger extent, they are safe”.
“Many Nigerians have been killed on their farms, in churches, in mosques, etc. Schools have been attacked, and students kidnapped or killed. Trains have been attacked, with passengers abducted and killed. These killings are unrelated to any separatist movement. Are they? AAA answered “No”.
The case, featuring terrorism and treasonable felony charges, was originally instituted in 2015 following Kanu’s arrest in Lagos.
Major setbacks have held the case down for almost a decade, making it impossible for the prosecution to call witnesses and present exhibits until Tuesday.
The case started with four people initially charged as Kanu’s co-defendants. However, in February 2018, the then-trial judge Binta Nyako severed the trial, separating Kanu — who had fled Nigeria — from the other defendants. The trial severance allowed the prosecution to continue proceedings against the four remaining co-defendants.
The Nigerian government re-arrested Kanu in Kenya in June 2021.