The Federal High Court in Abuja, on Wednesday, cautioned Nnamdi Kanu’s former lawyers, who he now called his “consultants,” against making comments that are contrary to the ethics of the legal profession.
Justice James Omotosho gave the warning after the Federal Government’s counsel, Chief Adegboyega Awomolo, SAN, accused the lawyers of granting media interviews and making subtle posts on social media in relation to the case.
The consultants, who were also in court for the proceedings, include P. A. N Ejiofor,
Aloy Ejimakor, Maxwell Opara and Mandela Umegburu.
Freedomonline reports that they were part of the team led by Chief Kanu Agabi, before they were disengaged by Kanu, leader of the proscribed Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) on Oct. 23.
Justice Omotosho equally ordered that the Department of State Services (DSS) give Kanu access to his consultants to consult with him to enable him prepare for his defence on Nov. 7, the next adjourned date.
The judge spoke while ruling on an application by Awomolo that Kanu’s defence should be foreclosed, having spent five out of the six days the court allocated to him to conduct his defence.
Justice Omotosho, however, gave Kanu the last opportunity to either enter his defence or be foreclosed.
He said it was his duty as a judge in the case to guide the defendant, who is not a lawyer, and to accord him sufficient opportunity to put in his defence.
“We had adjourned until today for the defendant to put in his defence or be deemed closed.
“But, I am bound to give him another opportunity to put in his defence. If he did not, I will deem him closed.
“I know that he is an Economist and not a lawyer.
“I will give the last opportunity to the defendant to put in his defence, failing which he would be deemed closed,” he said.
When the case was called earlier, the judge observed that the case was adjourned till Nov. 5 “for two things: Whether the defendant wants to have a rethink and get a counsel or that he should enter his defence.”
The judge then turned to Kanu, who sat in the dock, and demanded that he should proceed with his defence.
Kanu rose to his feet, told the court that he had some things to say that could embarrass the nation’s judiciary.
He then requested that Justice Omotosho should allow him and Awomolo to meet with him (judge) in his chambers for him to say what he claimed could embarrass the judiciary.
The judge declined Kanu’s request and insisted that he should say all that he wanted to say in the open court for all to hear.
On three occasions, the judge asked Kanu if what he planned to say was about any allegations of wrongdoing against his person, but Kanu answered in the negative, saying he had nothing against the judge.
Kanu later told the court that he intended to file some documents and wanted opportunity to meet with his consultants, whom he said were present in court.
When the judge asked the said consultants to identify themselves, Ejiofor, Ejimakor, Opara and Umegburu stood up and mentioned their names accordingly.
In response to the judge’s directive that he should speak in the open court, Kanu later brought out a document from which he read some arguments, faulting the charge against him.
He argued that the charge was invalid because, according to him, it was based on repealed laws that are no longer in existence.
“I am being asked to enter defence. I will, but I must know the law under which I am being tried to enable me prepare my defence,” he said.
He claimed that the prosecution was in breach of the directive of the Supreme Court for allegedly failing to amend the charge.
Kanu said he had not refused to enter a defence, but demand that he be shown the law under which he was being prosecuted.
He said since he was challenging the court’s jurisdiction, his right to fair hearing was sacrosant and must be respected.
He claimed to have been fooled into pleading to the charge, which he insisted, was invalid.
Kanu said: “I was deceived into pleading to a charge that does not exist, which is a direct violation of my right to fair hearing.”
When asked by the judge who deceived him, Kanu said: “The prosecution deceived me by filing a charge under laws that do not exist.
“I was duped and deceived into pleading to a charge that does not exist.”
Kanu then thanked the judge for granting him the indulgence to speak.
Responding, Awomolo observed that the court, on Tuesday, adjourned till Wednesday for Kanu to enter a defence in his trial or be deemed to have waived his right to do so.
He further observed that at the resumption of proceedings on Nov. 5, Kanu still declined to open his defence as ordered by the court.
He said such conduct amounted to a disobedience to an order of the court.
Awomolo urged the court to take note of the defendant’s position that he would not enter any defence because there was no valid charge against him.
He then prayed the court to foreclose the defendant and adjourn for judgment.
In his intervention, Justice Omotosho restated his advice to Kanu to consult an expert in criminal law to assist him in his defence.
“A lot of people are out there and you think they are experts in criminal procedure, they are not.
“It is not an area of law that people without experience can dabble into.
“Before man and God, I am here to give proper advice.
“I am not saying you are not entitled to take a position.
“To guide you properly, keep your gun powder dry. Keep your gun powder dry.
“I am not saying that you should not say anything that you feel you have against the court.
“That is not what I am saying. I am saying that the issue you raised about repealed laws should be raised at the final address stage,” Justice Omotosho said.
