A Federal High Court in Abuja banned Favour Kanu, the wife of Prince Fineboy Kanu, the younger brother of Nnamdi Kanu, the leader of the banned Indigenous People of Biafra, from attending the next three court sessions after she livestreamed the proceedings on her Facebook page.
The Federal Government has charged Kanu with terrorism.
On Tuesday, Justice James Omotosho granted the ruling following Favour’s apology and admission of live-streaming the session.
According to the judge, her behaviour might have qualified as contempt of court.
Even though her husband’s lawyer, Chief Kanu Agabi, also begged the court for forgiveness, Justice Omotosho maintained that she must be barred for three sittings.
The judge expressed disbelief that she still went ahead to post the video online despite her phone being seized during a previous court date for a similar offence.
“I want to hear from her. Were you not the one who took your phone?” the judge asked.
“I did not give the order to forfeit that phone. I don’t know if she might be a wife to my brother (Nnamdi Kanu),” he added.
Prince Fineboy Kanu replied, “She is my wife.”
Justice Omotosho warned that no one should take actions that could delay the trial, assuring that justice would be done.
During the proceeding, the federal government’s second prosecution witness told the Federal High Court in Abuja that Kanu is also the founder of the Eastern Security Network.
The witness code-named BBB stated under examination by the federal government’s lead counsel, Adegboyega Awomolo, in the open court presided over by Justice James Omotosho.
Recall that at the commencement of the trial, Awomolo had asked the court that the identities of the witnesses be concealed from the public and protected for security reasons.
He stated the charges against Kanu bothers on a serious offence of terrorism, hence, the need to protect the witnesses.
In a short ruling, Justice Omotosho granted the prosecution counsel’s request.
Kanu, who was initially facing a 15-count charge of terrorism and treason brought against him by the Attorney General of the Federation, got it downsized to 7 after the trial court struck out eight of the charges on April 8, 2022, for lacking substance.
At the resumed trial on Tuesday, BBB told the court that he was assigned by the Attorney General of the Federation to investigate Kanu.
Speaking further, he said from the findings of his investigation, “the defendant is the operator of Radio Biafra and the founder of the Eastern Security Network”.
Meanwhile, efforts by Awomolo to tender a letter authorising the witness to investigate the defendant were opposed by the defence lead counsel, Kanu Agabi.
Agabi objected to the tendering of the document because they had not been served.
The prosecution afterwards withdrew the document, and the court granted the withdrawal.
Likewise, Agabi also opposed the admissibility of a video evidence tendered by the Awomolo, citing same reasons that they have not been served.
The IPOB leader supported the submission of his counsel. The court ordered that all materials intended for trial must be served in advance and listed properly.
Justice Omotosho emphasised that no document would be admitted unless previously disclosed to the defence.
The prosecution informed the court that it had filed a motion for the release of certain evidence already tendered as exhibits—specifically, items numbered 1 to 28 and 30 to 39.
The court, in its response, directed that the motion must be refiled, with each exhibit explicitly identified and properly referenced.
Earlier, under re-examination by Awomolo, the prosecution witness code code-named AAA, stated that in his understanding of agitation in the context of the defendant, Kanu’s actions are driven by secessionist agitation, as he believes that the defendant was pushing for the secession of some parts of Nigeria.
Under cross-examination of AAA, by Agabi, the witness was questioned on his awareness of the charges brought against Kanu and previous rulings which the witness admitted to knowing little about the details of the 15-count charge, including several that had reportedly been struck out by the court.
The witness acknowledged awareness of IPOB’s role in enforcing Monday sit-at-home orders, which Agabi responded was among the charges that had been dismissed.
Agabi repeatedly highlighted that several serious terrorism-related allegations, including disruption of elections and attacks on federal property, were part of the struck-out charges, a point the witness said he was unaware of.
Awomolo, on his part, had also cited concerns about a motion served on his team for the release of certain exhibits tendered in court. He noted that the prosecution objected only to the release of non-perishable items.
Meanwhile, shortly after the commencement of the day’s proceedings, a mild drama over legal representation ensued.
Justice Omotosho informed the open court that he received a protest letter from one Charles Udeh, claiming to be part of the legal representation for the trial.
However, the legal team of the defendant denied knowledge of Ude, a stance Kanu himself affirmed, insisting Agabi is his counsel.
Following the response of the defence to the situation, Justice Omotosho addressed the issue of the defence team being overcrowded.
He proceeded to note that only the approved amount of counsel can be allowed on the defence team.
