Justice James Omotosho of the Federal High Court in Abuja ordered the removal of Nnamdi Kanu, leader of the proscribed Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), from the courtroom after he became disruptive during Thursday’s proceedings.
The judge had earlier dismissed three new motions filed by Kanu, ruling them unmeritorious following the adjournment of the case for judgment.
READ ALSO: Court Grants Sowore, Kanu’s Lawyer, Others Bail
As Justice Omotosho prepared to deliver the final ruling, Kanu insisted that the court could not proceed, claiming he had not yet filed his final written address. He also raised his voice in court, accusing the judge of bias and asserting that the judge lacked knowledge of the law.
A federal high court in Abuja has ruled that Nnamdi Kanu, leader of the proscribed Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), was not denied a fair hearing during his ongoing terrorism trial.
Delivering Thursday’s judgment, Justice James Omotosho dismissed Kanu’s claims, stating they “do not hold water.”
“This matter was assigned to this court in March 2025. Upon assumption of jurisdiction, I granted an accelerated hearing so as to accommodate this trial. The defendant became unruly and caused different delays,” the judge said.
Justice Omotosho noted that the prosecution concluded its case in June 2025 after calling five witnesses. Kanu subsequently filed a no-case submission, which was dismissed on September 26, 2025.
The judge further stated that despite repeated encouragement to engage legal counsel and present a defence, Kanu insisted there was no valid charge against him and declared his detention by the Department of State Services (DSS) unlawful.
In his ruling, the court highlighted that Kanu employed multiple tactics to delay proceedings, including claims of extraordinary rendition, sacking his lawyers, and citing illness, among other actions.
“Extraordinary rendition is a criminal offence, and oral evidence must be adduced to prove. He had the duty to call witnesses to prove that,” Omotosho said.
READ ALSO: Judge orders security to remove Nnamdi Kanu from courtroom
“The failure of the defendant to call witnesses to give oral evidence to prove his allegation of extraordinary rendition made his case weak.
“It is a mystery to this court that a defendant who is standing trial will delay his own trial.
“The court has carefully observed the conduct of the defendant, and the fitness of the defendant is clear even without the medical report of the NMA. I therefore hold without doubt that the defendant is fit to stand his trial.
“This court gave 6 consecutive days for him to open trial. he kept making excuses just to stall the trial. He asked for witness summons which the court graciously granted, but he abandoned all of it. He refused to take lawyers pro bono given to him
Advertisement
“This court has been extremely patient with the defendant. He cannot complain of a lack of a fair hearing. Such rights cannot be taken from him except he expressly waives it.”
On October 27, the court told Kanu to open his defence or file a final written address. Instead, he filed motions, including a “Motion/comprehensive written address” praying for the court to discharge him.
He filed a preliminary objection on October 16
“This will be treated as the final written address. All will be taken into consideration,” the court held.
“Kanu also said he was deceived into making a plea. But before taking his plea, He was asked if he understood and spoke English language. At first, he said he did not understand the charge; it was then read again. And he pleaded not guilty to all.
“The defendant cannot turn around and say he was deceived into taking his plea. It is just one of his tactics to delay the trial.”
On the issue of inadequate facilities to prepare for his defence, the court held “that there is nothing to show that he was denied adequate facility to prepare for his defence”.
“His allegation holds no water, and in the light of the circumstances, this issue is resolved against the defendant,” Omotosho added.
