The trial of Nnamdi Kanu, the leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), resumed before Justice James Omotosho at the Federal High Court in Abuja, with the cross-examination of the prosecution’s Principal Witness 1 (PW1).
During the hearing, the court granted the Federal Government’s request for witnesses to testify behind screens.
The prosecution team was led by Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN) Adegboyega Awomolo, while the defense was headed by former Attorney General of the Federation, Kanu Agabi. A Department of State Services (DSS) officer, identified as AAA, appeared as PW1.
AAA was asked whether he was the officer conducting the interview shown in a video presented in court. He confirmed that five officers were present during the interview and that he was one of them. He explained that his involvement in the investigation was limited to arresting the defendant, obtaining his statement, and escorting him to Abuja for further investigation.
When asked if any of the items presented in court were offensive on the surface, AAA responded in the negative. He admitted to analyzing only Kanu’s phone among the items recovered and confirmed that the phone was submitted as evidence. However, he noted that no analysis report was submitted as evidence, as it was deemed irrelevant to the case.
When asked, “Do you agree that in the 10 years since you confiscated these items, many of them have lost their use?” AAA said “yes”.
He was asked whether there is a record of the items he claims the DSS returned to the defendant. He answered yes, but he didn’t personally keep the records.
He was asked if he found any instrument of violence on that lady with Kanu. He said no.
He was asked if he considered the lady’s company as facilitating terrorism. He said “no”.
“Did you find any instrument of terrorism on the lady?” “No,” he said. “Did you find any instrument of terrorism on the defendant?” “No,” he answered.
“Did you contact anybody whom the defendant mentioned as working with him?” AAA said the defendant didn’t mention any names.
“Do you know if there are other people standing terrorism trial with the defendant in this case?” AAA said no.
“I put it to you that there’s no other person in the whole of Nigeria who is standing terrorism trial for Biafra agitation except the defendant,” Agabi said. And AAA said he knew some people stood trial with him earlier, but he doesn’t know the state of those trials now.
AAA also mentioned that he has read from social media and newspapers that the defendants have supporters like Simon Ekpa, who also carry on the agitation.
He said he knows that the DSS is in the process of extraditing Simon Ekpa to Nigeria to face charges.
“Is the defendant charged with damaging anybody’s property?” AAA answered, “Maybe not personally and virtually”.
“How virtually?” AAA said there are social media messages where the defendant was inciting violence.
“Do you know one person who carried out any act of violence because the defendant incited him?” “I don’t know,” AAA answered.
“Do you remember that the defendant said there is corruption, youth unemployment, and a lack of development in Nigeria?” AAA said he cannot remember, but he remembers the defendant calling Nigeria a Zoo.
Asked whether he remembered that the defendant said IPOB was not an armed group and does not give armed training to its members, he said he remembers the defendant saying IPOB does not bear arms.
“There have been killings in Kaduna, Zamfara, Benue, Plateau, and other parts of the north. Are those killings based on any agitation for separation?” AAA answered, “To the best of my knowledge, no.”
“Do you agree that our highways are not safe to some extent?” AAA answered, “To a larger extent, they are safe”.
“Many Nigerians have been killed on their farms, in churches, in mosques, etc. Schools have been attacked, and students kidnapped or killed. Trains have been attacked, and passengers kidnapped and killed. These killings are not the product of any agitation for separation. Are they? AAA answered “No”.
The case, featuring terrorism and treasonable felony charges, was originally instituted in 2015 following Kanu’s arrest in Lagos.
Major setbacks have held the case down for almost a decade, making it impossible for the prosecution to call witnesses and present exhibits until Tuesday.
The case started with four people initially charged as Kanu’s co-defendants. However, in February 2018, the then-trial judge Binta Nyako severed the trial, separating Kanu — who had fled Nigeria — from the other defendants. The trial severance allowed the prosecution to continue proceedings against the four remaining co-defendants.
The Nigerian government re-arrested Kanu in Kenya in June 2021.