The Federal High Court in Abuja on Wednesday has admitted in evidence, an Abia State High Court judgement which awarded “N1 billion damages” in favor the leader of the proscribed Indigenous People of Biafra, Nnamdi Kanu, following the invasion of his home by security agencies, in the latter’s ongoing treasonable felony and terrorism trial by the federal government.
Justice James Omotoso admitted the document as an exhibit as requested by Kanu’s lawyer, Paul Erokoro SAN.
Recall that the federal government had accused Kanu of broadcasting threats across Nigeria, warning that anyone who flouted a sit-at-home order in the southeast would face consequences and inciting insurrection against the government.
The federal government further alleged that, based on Kanu’s threats, banks, schools, markets, shopping malls, and petrol stations in the southeast remained closed mostly on Mondays.
Kanu denied the allegations in the 2015 case, paving the way for trial; however, the trial commenced in 2025.
What transpired in court
At the court session on Wednesday, an operative of the Department of State Services (DSS), identified with the code-name “BBB,” informed the court that Kanu was neither arrested nor detained by the service in Kenya, as alleged by Kanu and his lawyers.
- The witness had, during his examination-in-chief, stressed that Radio Biafra was not licensed in Nigeria and that Kanu allegedly ordered his followers to kill people.
- He further stated that security agencies established that Nnamdi Kanu called for sit-at-home orders and directed his followers to enforce them.
The witness, being cross-examined by one of the IPOB leader’s counsel, Paul Erokoro, SAN, said that, regarding the probe of Nnamdi Kanu, the DSS code of conduct requires operatives to always be neutral and objective.
- When asked if he was among the operatives that arrested Nnamdi Kanu in Kenya, the witness replied that his department did not determine whether Nnamdi Kanu was kidnapped from Kenya.
He further stated, “DSS did not kidnap Kanu in Kenya,” emphasizing that the secret police do not operate outside Nigeria but are focused on internal security.
“We are confined to Nigeria. We did not arrest Kanu in Kenya,” he added.
- The witness denied knowing how many international treaties Nigeria has signed, but added that Nigeria is a member of the United Nations.
- He confirmed that agitations for independence occurred in several countries in 1960, the same period Nigeria gained independence from Britain.
- He admitted knowing that South Sudan separated from Sudan and that Scotland is agitating for independence from Britain.
He added, however, that Kanu allegedly called for Biafra secession “by any means possible, including war.”
- The witness confirmed hearing the word “Biafra” many years ago but maintained that Biafra remains part of Nigeria.
“Biafra fought a war against Nigeria, but there is currently no entity recognized as Biafra,” he added.
- The witness confirmed being aware that several courts have held that the arrest of Nnamdi Kanu and the invasion of his home were illegal, adding, “Yes, I have read about it.”
“You said you read it in the newspaper? Now, the High Court of Abia state in the case between Nnamdi Kanu and the Federal Republic of Nigeria, in Suit number HIN/FR/4/2021, declared that the military invasion of the applicant’s(Nnamdi Kanu) home in Abia state on September 10, 2017 was unlawful amounting to a violation of the applicant’s fundamental right to life and personal liberty and the Court awarded damages of N1 billion to the applicant,” Erokoro told the witness in open Court.
- Erokoro then gave the witness the said judgement(through the registrar) and asked the witness to read the parties on the face of the document, to which the witness confirmed were Nnamdi Kanu and FG, Nigerian Army, DSS, and other security agencies.
- Erokoro then applied to tender three judgments: the Federal High Court Umuahia judgment and the referenced Abia High Court judgment, and another, delivered from 2022 and 2023, respectively, against the FG and security agencies.
The exhibits were not opposed by the prosecution counsel, Adegboyega Awomolo, SAN.
Justice Omotoso then admitted the exhibits as evidence.
“The certified true copy of the judgment in HIN/FR/4/2021 between Nnamdi Kanu versus FRN and seven others is hereby admitted and marked as Exhibit,” the judge added.
The witness stood his ground that the people Kanu allegedly incited burned buses during EndSARS protests in Lagos.
- The witness said there is no issue with sit-at-home orders, but the one called by the IPOB leader was “notorious” because people in the Southeast were forced to comply.
- He said he does not have the names of the police stations burned by suspected IPOB adherents in the Southeast.
The witness was asked if he knew TY Danjuma, a former Nigerian military general, to which he responded in the affirmative.
- He confirmed being aware of TY Danjuma’s statement that the armed forces are not neutral.
- However, he denied being aware of other remarks made by Danjuma about citizens defending themselves.
After that, Erokoro said there were things the defense team needed to access in order to continue cross-examining the witness.
- Omotoso responded that the court was inclined to adjourn to tomorrow, Thursday, for the conclusion of the cross-examination.
The judge ordered that if the defense fails to conclude its cross-examination of BBB by tomorrow, its cross-examination will be deemed closed.
