Victor EzejaLeader of the proscribed Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Mazi Nnamdi Kanu, has again questioned the impartiality of the trial judge, Justice Binta Nyako, in his case against the Federal Government.
This came as the Federal High Court in Abuja on Monday, February 10, adjourned indefinitely, the terrorism trial against Kanu.
Join our WhatsApp ChannelIn response to Kanu’s objection, Judge Binta Nyako declared that the case would be postponed indefinitely. This is the second time in about four months that the IPOB leader has voiced distrust in Justice Nyako’s handling of the case.
During Monday’s proceedings, Kanu expressed his displeasure over the decision of the Chief Judge in returning the case to Justice Nyako.
Prime Business Africa recalls that Kanu had earlier expressed a lack of confidence in Justice Nyako handling his case.
On 24 September, the trial judge recused herself after an oral application by the defendant. However, the Chief Judge, John Tsoho, returned the case file to Nyako for continuation of the trial. The Chief Judge argued that the oral application made by the defendant for the trial judge’s recusal was not acceptable.
In a letter dated December 5, 2024, the prosecution counsel, Adegboyega Awomolo, asked the court to schedule a date for the commencement of the trial.
However, Kanu’s counsel, Aloy Ejimakor, in a letter dated December 9, 2024, opposed the request for a trial date, arguing that the ruling of the judge recusing herself remains valid. Ejimakor also asked that the case be transferred to a federal high court in the South-east if no judge in Abuja is willing to preside over it.
During Monday’s proceedings, Awomolo informed the court that the prosecution’s counsel was prepared to move on with the trial after filing and serving all required procedures in the case. Ejimakor, however, said that was not the matter at hand.
READ ALSO: ‘Nnamdi Kanu’s Release Will Restore Peace In South-east’
Nyako clarified that despite her desire not to preside over the case, the chief judge rejected her recusal and instructed the defendant to submit a formal motion requesting that the case be reassigned to a different judge.
Kanu, who interjected while the lawyers were arguing over whether a formal motion was required, said he only came to court because of his respect for the rule of law, insisting that the judge had previously recused herself from the case.
When told that he has the right to appeal the directive of the Chief Judge, Kanu said: “If the Chief Judge disagrees, he should appeal the decision.
He maintained that Justice Nyako could not preside over this case. “You stand recused and you must leave my case. I don’t need you in my case. You are biased. Tell the chief judge that Nnamdi Kanu said so,” Kanu stated.
The IPOB leader described the court as “a shrine to injustice”, adding that he would not subject himself to it.
Awomolo submitted that since the defendant has failed to file a formal application requesting for recusal of the trial judge, a date for trial should be fixed.
Nyako, however, ruled that the case has been adjourned indefinitely.
Victor Ezeja is a passionate journalist with six years of experience writing on economy, politics and energy. He holds a Masters degree in Mass Communication.
