•Supports out-of-court settlement •Trial to start afresh, say lawyers

The Ohanaeze Ndigbo has lamented what it called injustice in the handling of the case of treason charge against the leader of the proscribed Indigenous People of Biafra, (IPOB) Mazi Nnamdi Kanu.

The body also backed the suggestion of Kanu for an out-of-court settlement in his case with the Federal Government.

It equally expressed happiness over the withdrawal of the presiding Judge in the matter, noting that it was long over due.

According to the National Vice President of Ohanaeze Ndigbo, Chief Damian Okeke Ogene: “We have been expecting the presiding Judge to withdraw herself from the matter just as Nnamdi Kanu had suggested that he recuse herself from the matter

“Our brother, Nnamdi Kanu, has said it severally that if he is released, all these issues about killings and kidnapping by those claiming to be members of IPOB would be over.

“We wonder why the Federal Government is delaying the release of our brother and this appears to be a plot by some people to make sure that insecurity continues in Igbo land and this is not fair.”

Okeke noted that the continuous detention of Nnamdi Kanu was just a “plot to make the South East ungovernable and they also know the grave consequences of what they are doing .

“If Nnamdi Kanu is released, then we can now know those in the bush causing trouble because they claim that it is because of the detention of Nnamdi Kanu ” he said

Meanwhile, ongoing trial of Kanu may suffer another setback, as the trial Judge , Justice Binta Nyako, withdrew from the case .

The withdrawal of the judge was premised on the request of Kanu, who had at the last proceeding, accused the judge of disobeying an order of the Supreme Court.

Kanu also accused the Judge of bias, stating that he was sure that he would not get justice, if Justice Nyako continued to preside over his matter .

The Supreme Court judgement Kanu referred to was delivered in December 2023.

In the said judgement, the apex court dismissed an Appeal Court decision, which ordered the release of Kanu.

In a judgment read by Justice Emmanuel Agim, the apex court noted that despite series of illegalities carried out by the government, including a military raid on his home, prompting his fleeing the country for safety and his subsequent extradition from Kenya, that’s not enough to stop a trial.

The apex court, while condemning the action of the government, said the law of Nigeria hasn’t reached a point that a trial will stop on account of illegality by the prosecution, adding that is a matter of legislation.

The court said Kanu should therefore seek redress by a civil suit against the infringement of fundamental rights.

With the judgment, the trial of the IPOB leader on the remaining seven count charge bordering on terrorism and treason continued at the Federal High Court.

Kanu was first arrested in 2015 for leading a separatist campaign in Nigeria’s South-East region through broadcasts on Radio Biafra, a station which the government alleged was used by the IPOB leader to incite violence.

Meanwhile, the withdrawal of Justice Nyako from the matter will bring a set back to tha trial.

Commenting on this, an Abuja based lawyer, Abiodun Olonade, noted that when a judge withdraws from a matter and the case file returned to the head of the court for re-assignment, such case will start all over.

“The recusal of Justice Nyako from the trial of Nnamdi Kanu will bring a great setback for the trial.

“This is because the Chief Judge of the Federal High Court will have to re-assign the case to another judge .

“By the virtue of this, the case will start de-novo. That is, it will start all over again from arraignment afresh .

“Everything that has been done before the judge that recused herself will become void. “I don’t think, this is the right time for Kanu to ask the judge to recuse herself if truly he wants an accelerated hearing”.

Another lawyer, Tosin Ojaomo, while reacting, noted that the law is trite that justice is rooted in confidence, where a party before the court believes or have a reason to believe that justice will not be served, it is within the right of such party to raise it before the judex either by himself or through his counsel.

“One of the challenges in our criminal justice system is the length of time it takes to complete criminal prosecution. It should not take years for any person standing trial to know his or her fate. We need urgent reforms and one of such is to do away with starting trial deno vo when a new judge takes over a matter, especially partly heard matters. There is nothing stopping the adoption of the old proceedings for the new judge to evaluate the evidence and deliver judgement thereon since all the proceedings are recorded. Court of record implies that records are indeed intact.

“As one of the counsel that stood for Chief Sunday Adeyemo, aka Igboho, in the case which he instituted against Republic of Benin before the ECOWAS court, wherein the court agreed that his right was indeed violated, I think issues involving Nnamdi Kanu should be resolved through political solution, since he has offered to assist the government to stop the carnage currently going on in the South East.

“I advise that the government and Mazi Nnamdi Kanu with his legal team should consider a political resolution of this matter in the interest of peace and justice.

Please follow and like us: