Leader of the proscribed Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Nnamdi Kanu yesterday told the court that he was misguided to enter a plea into a charge that does not exist.

Still declining to enter his defence, Justice James Omotosho gave him a last opportunity to do so today or wave his right. Federal High Court, Abuja judge said it was his duty as a judge in the case to guide the defendant, who is not a lawyer, and to accord him sufficient opportunity to put in his defence.

“We had adjourned till today (November 5) for the defendant to put in his defence or be deemed closed. But, I am bound to give him another opportunity to put in his defence. If he did not, I will deem him closed.

“I know that he is an Economist and not a lawyer. I will give the last opportunity to the defendant to put in his defence, failing which he would be deemed closed.”

Justice Omotosho ordered that the Department of State Services (DSS) give the defendant access to his consultants, who were his counsel before, but now consultants, to consult with him to enable him prepare for his defence, which he is to open on November 7 (tomorrow).

The judge spoke while ruling on an application by the prosecuting lawyer, Adegboyega Awomolo (SAN) that the court should foreclose Kanu, who failed to enter his defence, having spent five of the six days the court allocated to him to conduct his defence.

Earlier at the commencement of proceedings, the judge noted that the case was adjourned till yesterday “for two reasons: Whether the defendant wants to have a rethink and get a counsel or that he should enter his defence.”

The judge then turned to Kanu, who sat in the dock, and demanded that he should proceed with his defence.

Kanu rose to his feet, told the court that he has some things to say that could embarrass the nation’s Judiciary.

He then, requested that the judge should allow him and Awomolo to meet with him in his chambers (the judge’s) for him to say what he claimed could embarrass the Judiciary.

The judge declined Kanu’s request and insisted that he should say all that he wanted to say in the open court for all to hear.

On three occasions, the judge asked Kanu if what he planned to say was about any allegations of wrongdoing against his person, to which the defendant answered in the negative, saying he has nothing against the judge.

Kanu later told the court that he intended to file some documents and wanted opportunity to meet with his consultants, whom he said were present in court.

When the judge asked the said consultants to identify themselves, they turned out to be some members of the defendant’s legal team, led by Kanu Agabi (SAN), which he sacked on October 23, the day he was initially scheduled to open his defence.

The lawyers are P. A. N Ejiofor, Aloy Ejimakor, Maxwell Opara and Mandela Umegburu. Ejimakor even told the court that he prepared some documents for the defendant.

In response to the judge’s directive that he should speak in the open court, Kanu later brought out a document from which he read some arguments, faulting the charge against him.

He argued that the charge was invalid because, according to him, it was based on repealed laws that are no longer in existence.

Kanu said: “I am being asked to enter defence. I will, but I must know the law under which I am being tried to enable me prepare my defence.”

He claimed that the prosecution was in breach of the directive of the Supreme Court for allegedly failing to amend the charge.

Kanu said he has not refused to enter a defence, but demand that he be shown the law under which he is being prosecuted.

He said since he was challenging the court’s jurisdiction, his right to fair hearing was sancrosant and must be respected. He claimed to have been fooled into pleading to the charge, which he insisted, is invalid.

Kanu said: “I was deceived into pleading to a charge that does not exist, which is a direct violation of my right to fair hearing.”

When asked by the judge who deceived him, Kanu said: “The prosecution deceived me by filing a charge under laws that do not exist. I was duped and deceived into pleading to a charge that does not exist,” he said.

Kanu then thanked the judge for granting him the indulgence to speak.

Responding, Awomolo noted that the court, on Tuesday, adjourned till Wednesday for Kanu to enter a defence in his trial or be deemed to have waived his right to do so.

He noted that at the resumption of proceedings on Tuesday, Kanu still declined to open his defence as ordered by the court, conduct which Awomolo said amounted to a disobedience to an order of the court.

Awomolo urged the court to take note of the defendant’s position that he would not enter any defence because there is no valid charge against him.

He then prayed the court to foreclose the defendant and adjourn for judgment.

In his intervention, Justice Omotosho restated his advice to Kanu to consult an expert in criminal law to assist him in his defence.

The judge said: “A lot of people are out there and you think they are experts in criminal procedure, they are not. It is not an area of law that people without experience can dabble into.

“Before man and God, I am here to give proper advice. I am not saying you are not entitled to take a position. To guide you properly, keep your gun powder dry. Keep your gun powder dry.

“I am not saying that you should not say anything that you feel you have against the court. That is not what I am saying. I am saying that the issue you raised about repealed laws should be raised at the final address stage,” Justice Omotosho said.

Meanwhile, following complaint by Awomolo, Justice Omotosho cautioned Kanu’s four consultants to conduct themselves within the ethics of the legal profession.

Awomolo had accused the lawyers of granting media interviews and making subtle posts on social media in relation to the case.

Source; The Nation News