The Federal High Court in Abuja again begged Nnamdi Kanu, leader of the proscribed Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), to enter his defence in the ongoing alleged terrorism offences.
Justice James Omotosho, who told Kanu the implication of his continuous refusal to open his defence on Tuesday, urged him to consult legal experts for appropriate guidance.
The development occurred following the IPOB ‘s insistence that there was no valid charge against him to enter defence.
Kanu restated that there is no law under which he is being trial in the ongoing alleged terrorism offences.
The defendant, who appeared for himself, told Justice Omotosho shortly when the case was called for him to open his defence.
The IPOB leader argued that the law, under which he is being tried, is a repealed law.
He said the Supreme Court’s directive, made through Justice Lawal Garba, had not been given effect in the instant case.
He said there was no part in the ruling of the court on his no-case submission that mentioned the repealed law of the terrorism act.
He said the apex court said that the criminal code, under which he is being tried, does not exist.
“My lord, the very charge upon which the entire ruling was based, does not exist.
“Even as I came to this court today, there is no charge against me,” he said.
The prosecution lawyer, Chief Adegboyega Awomolo, SAN, informed the court that on Friday, they were served with Kanu’s motion on notice, which the senior lawyer referred to as “a piece of paper.”
“My lord, on Friday, we were served with a piece of paper titled motion on notice and final address of the defendant.
“What I was served is a piece of paper that carries no stamp of this court, no signature of revenue collector, etc,” he said.
He said an unsigned document is a worthless paper which does not have any efficacy in law according to the Supreme Court.
He, however, told the court that the prosecution had answered all the 10 points earlier raised by Kanu, including issues of the repealed law, extra-ordinary rendition, etc, in their final written address.
Awomolo said they were ready to adopt their final written address in order for the court to adjourn for judgment.
However, Justice Omotosho said he was inclined to grant Kanu an adjournment to consult legal experts on his need to enter his defence.
The judge told the IPOB leader that if the Supreme Court did not want him to face trial, the apex court would not have sent his file back to the court for retrial.
He said he was still presumed innocent despite the order to open his defence.
Justice Omotosho, who described Kanu as a layman, said he was inclined to grant him another opportunity in the interest of fair hearing.
The judge, however, threatened to foreclose his defence if he failed to enter a defence.
He said should Kanu fail to open his defence on Nov. 5, he would be deemed to have waived his right to do so.
The judge then adjourned the matter until Nov. 5 for Kanu to open his defence.
Freedomonline reports that Justice Omotosho had, on Oct. 27, adjourned till Nov. 4 for Kanu to either file his final written address or open his defence.
