...Calls on the court to dismiss the no-case argument of the IPOB leaderA Federal High Court in Abuja was reportedly asked on Friday to compel the detained head of the banned Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Nnamdi Kanu, to present his defense against the terrorism charges brought by the Federal Government.
Prosecuting attorney Adegboyega Awomolo, SAN, who raised this request during Friday's session, also called on the court to dismiss the no-case argument presented by Nnamdi Kanu.
He requested the court to instead compel him to clarify why he participated in terrorist actions that encouraged violence and destruction, including the killing of at least 170 security personnel.
Awomolo, by endorsing the prosecution's argument against Nnamdi Kanu's no-case submission, informed the court that the prosecution has provided adequate evidence to establish all components of the charges brought against Kanu, thereby requiring the court to ask him to present his defense.
He mentioned that the prosecution called five witnesses and presented numerous exhibits, including video and audio evidence, stating that, contrary to the defense lawyer Kanu Agabi, SAN's assertion, the prosecution's reply covered all points raised, indicating that the no case submission is irrelevant.
Awomolo, who asked the court to reject the no-case argument, stated that at this point in the case, the court's task was simply to examine the evidence presented so far and decide if a reasonable case has been established against the defendant, necessitating his response.
He pointed out that the defense, in its no-case argument, questioned the reliability of the witnesses and the evidence presented up to this point, which is not appropriate at this stage.
Stressing the reasons the court should dismiss the no-case argument, the experienced attorney pointed out that in both the video and audio evidence presented by the prosecution, Nnamdi Kanu acknowledged leading IPOB, which he was aware was an illegal organization.
He mentioned that Kanu, in other videos as well, acknowledged producing broadcasts where he is alleged to have incited violence and destruction.
Quoting part of the defendant's statement in support of his no-case argument, Awomolo criticized the lawyer's claim that Kanu's multiple broadcasts constituted an obvious act of bragging that did not necessitate legal action.
Awomolo claimed that the law bans remarks which could instill fear among the public, and stated, "Why would someone who declared that security officers and others should be killed be permitted to walk free?"
Awomolo claimed that the defendant's goal was to establish an independent state of Biafra, and during this effort, at least 170 security personnel lost their lives due to his aggressive claims.
Why was he bragging? Bragging isn't the solution. If the defendant thinks he was just joking and is a content producer, he needs to explain why he was boasting and causing fear among the public.
"If someone is bragging and threatening death and violence, this cannot be considered just idle talk," Awomolo stated, and called on the court to ask the defendant to appear and clarify what his claims were about.
Awomolo disputed Agabi's assertion that the defendant has been in isolation for ten years, clarifying that Kanu, who was initially arrested in 2015, received bail in 2017, which he remained under until 2022 when it was canceled because he failed to appear.
He stated that the defendant's current detention was based on a court order, which determined that he had skipped the previous bail and accused the defense legal team of causing the delays in the case up to that point.
"For three years, the advice provided by his legal team led to the postponement of the trial. The delay was due to the actions of the defense team, not the prosecution. It is incorrect to say that their case has taken ten years. They are the ones responsible for the delay," Awomolo said.
Regarding Kanu's claim that IPOB was not legally banned, Awomolo argued that as the matter is currently under consideration by the Supreme Court, it would be unsuitable for the trial court to make a determination on whether the ban was properly implemented.
Previously, Agabi claimed that the prosecution's only achievement was to portray the defendant as a bad person, asserting that none of the specific elements of the alleged offenses were established by the prosecution, and noting that the prosecution did not present any witness who testified that they were incited by Kanu's broadcasts.
Agabi stated, "This man (Kanu) can brag. He was just talking proudly. He claimed I can halt the entire world. I don't find anything wrong with that. You don't take legal action against someone for simply boasting."
He brought the court's focus to the surge of murders across various regions of the nation, and contended that the defendant was similarly troubled by the level of instability within the country.
Although maintaining that the defendant committed no wrongdoing, Agabi stated that the defense team presented evidence in the case where the Director General of the Department of State Services (DSS), Adeola Ajayi, and a former Defence Minister, Theophilus Danjuma, were recorded expressing the view that individuals should protect themselves from assaults.
He claimed that "the defendant's statement was that individuals should protect themselves" and criticized the END SARS report presented by the prosecution, stating that it lacked proper authentication.
Agabi stated that his client has been isolated for over six years, pointing out that according to international law, solitary confinement should not last more than 15 days.
The defense attorney stated, "He (the defendant) is no longer normal due to his solitary confinement. The case has been delayed for ten years."
"Many memories have disappeared, which is why most of the prosecution's witnesses were stating they couldn't recall, they didn't know, when questioned," he said.
He also criticized the death certificates submitted by the prosecution, stating that the documents were presented without summoning the physicians for cross-examination.
Agabi pointed out that, according to the transcript, the witnesses presented by the prosecution responded with "I don't remember, I am not aware, I don't know" 80 times during their questioning. He further stated that these types of answers fail to meet the standard of proof required beyond a reasonable doubt.
Agabi, who mentioned that the defense team presented 40 arguments in their statement, noted that the prosecution did not address 10 matters raised by the defense.
If the prosecution did not address one or two points, it would be sufficient for the court to declare the defendant not guilty. However, in this instance, the prosecution neglected to respond to ten issues presented by the defense.
The involvement of the witnesses was restricted to gathering testimonies. The testimonies provided by the accused were not examined.
"All the witnesses were from the DSS. That's why they kept saying I don't remember, I'm not aware, because they didn't do anything," he stated, and asked the court not to give any evidentiary weight to the extra evidence submitted after the trial had started in the case.
He mentioned that the charge had been modified approximately seven times, yet no individuals' names were listed as those who were incited by the defendant.
Agabi criticized the banning of IPOB, stating that such a ban cannot occur without the President's consent. "Without the President's approval, no ban can be imposed."
"We are stating there is no restriction, as there is no presidential endorsement; if they possess it, they should present it," he said, and claimed that the court did not have the authority to handle the charge concerning the alleged illegal imported transmitter, pointing out that the Court of Appeal had already made a decision on this matter.
Following the presentation of arguments by attorneys from both parties, the trial Judge, Justice James Omotosho, postponed the proceedings until October 10 to decide whether to accept the no-case submission and release the defendant or to deny it and require him to present his defense.
RELATED READ TOP STORIES FROM NIGERIAN TRIBUNE
Provided by SyndiGate Media Inc.Syndigate.info).
Posting Komentar