The trial of Nnamdi Kanu continued on Wednesday with Federal High Court Justice James Omotosho sounding a note of warning to a member of his defence team, Aloy Ejimakor, for illegally live-streaming court proceedings and documents on social media.
The court also warned Kanu’s legal team to put its house in order, saying the teams’ incessant prayers for adjournments was stalling the IPOB leader’s trial.
The warnings came on a day the defence team continued with the cross examination of the government’s second witness, an officer of Department of State Services, DSS, in the ongoing terrorism trial at the Federal High Court in Abuja.
Justice Omotosho issued the caution after Paul Erokoro, SAN, who conducted the defence’s case, suddenly requested for adjournment midway into his cross-examination of the second prosecution witness.
In reaction to Erokoro’s request for adjournment, prosecuting lawyer, Adegboyega Awomolo, SAN, expressed discomfort and raised an objection.
Awomolo reminded the court that it had announced sufficient time for the defence to conclude with the second prosecution witness between May 21 and 22.
He wondered why Erokoro suddenly became unwilling to continue with the witness.
Erokoro however said he decided to ask for an adjournment because the defence plans to play some video recordings which were not immediately available in court.
Justice Omotosho agreed with Awomolo’s observation that the court, on May 14, chose to clear its schedule to enable the defence to conclude with the second prosecution witness.
The judge however, agreed to grant the adjournment, warning that the court will deem the defence to have closed its cross-examination of the witness should the defence team fail to conclude with the witness on May 22.
Earlier, the lead defence lawyer, Kanu Agabi, SAN, and Awomolo expressed concern about the conduct of a member of the defence’s legal team, Alloy Ejimakor, who they accused of being behind the misrepresentation of court’s proceedings on his social media platforms.
Agabi said he got a letter from the prosecution in which it expressed concerns about some publications made on social media. He then, sought the court’s opinions on the issue.
Also Read: Kanu confirms evidence of DSS on his plans to attack Tinubu
The judge pushed the issue back to him and sought his opinion and Agabi responded by saying he would apologise to the court, even though he knew nothing about the publications.
When asked to react, Awomolo confirmed that he wrote a letter on May 14 protesting the misrepresentations that were being published in the social media.
Awomolo said he learnt the court’s proceedings on the case was being streamed live by some individuals, some of whom are lawyers.
The prosecuting lawyer noted that the case is a very sensitive one that should not be trivialised, adding that “it is not fair to manipulate what happened in court in the public domain.”
Awomolo reached for his phone in a bid to draw the court’s attention to what he said Alloy Ejimakor was doing on the social media.
He handed the phone to Agabi, pointing to a recent post he said Ejimakor made on his social media platform.
Agabi collected the phone from Awomolo and told the court that he had also read something about himself on the social media, misrepresenting happenings in the case.
Justice Omotosho said the developments do not benefit both sides, adding “it will only delay proceedings. We should not lay emphasis on what are happening on the social media.
“Although one of our brothers has not been acting well. I have said it before; we should act professionally.
“Most of these things are gross misconduct on which you could be disbarred. It is a misconduct. I don’t want to mention any name. The person knows himself. Let us act well,” Justice Omotosho said.
Ejimakor, who is a member of the defence legal team, sat quietly in the courtroom as everyone spoke about his conduct.
At the resumption of cross examination on Wednesday, the second prosecution witness said he did not know whether Radio Biafra has stopped broadcasting, but that Kanu confirmed being the founder of the station.
The witness, an official of the DSS, said the agency was not being influenced by politicians or political appointees, but that the agency is under the office of the National Security Adviser.
He said he was not part of those who arrested Kanu in Kenya and rejected the suggestion by Erokoro that the DSS was involved in how the defendant was apprehended in Kenya.
The witness, who said his agency does not engage in foreign operations, said it was not part of his brief to ascertain Kanu’s claim that he was kidnapped in Kenya.
He said he knew Nigeria went through colonial rule but did not read anywhere where Nigerians who called for independence were labelled terrorists.
On whether he has ever heard of Odimegwu Ojukwu, the witness said Ojukwu was a member of the Nigerian Army, who later decided to wage war against Nigeria.
He said Biafra has never been a recognised entity anywhere in Nigeria.
The witness said there was nothing wrong in people calling for change through peaceful means, but that Kanu resorted to calling for violence and killings in his broadcasts on Radio Biafra.
He said he is not aware that the defendant called Simon Ekpa to stop what he was doing.
On whether he is aware that courts in the country have held that the arrest and detention of the defendant is illegal, the witness said he read about them online and in the newspapers.
Erokoro then tendered three judgments given in favour of Kanu by three court, which the court admitted in evidence.
The first was delivered on January 19, 2022 by the Umuahia division of the HIgh Court of Abia State; the second, delivered on October 26, 2022 by a Federal High Court in Umuahia and the third delivered on October 26, 2023 by a HIgh Court of Enugu State.
In the judgments, the courts faulted Kanu’s arrest and detention and the invasion of his home in Abia State by some soldiers.
The witness said the DSS was only involved in Kanu’s arrest in Lagos, adding that the defendant called for the killing of security personnel.
On Erokoro’s suggestion that Kanu’s call on his followers to kill security personnel who try to kill them was a self defence strategy, the witness said he is not aware of any law in Nigeria that allows anybody to kill fellow human being.
He said he was not aware that the Director General of the DSS called on Nigerians to engage in self-defence.
The witness said he was aware that former Defence Minister, General Theophilus Danjuma once claimed that security personnel in the country were not neutral in the security challenge being experienced in the country.
Crediblenewsng.com
