IPOB writes British High Commission over Nnamdi Kanu detention

(Nigeria) The Indigenous People of Biafra IPOB, has petitioned the British High Commission, Abuja over the injustice meted to him by Nigerian Federal Government in the case Federal Republic of Nigeria versus Nnamdi Kanu.

In the letter through their lawyer, Ifeanyi Ejiofor, titled Nnamdi Kanu: A victim of travesty of justice and a call for British Government to be on the watch” IPOB said,  there was a deliberate design by the Nigerian Government to subvert the course of justice in the criminal trial of Mr. Kanu.

“It is repeating the obvious to state that our client is a full British citizen, by virtue of which position he is entitled to all rights, privileges and protections guaranteed under the British Laws and convention.

“We are therefore constrained in the circumstances, to formally notify the British Government vide this medium, of our well informed reservations, and apprehension, that Nnamdi Kanu is undergoing persecution in the charge and there is deliberate design by the bpersecutors to frustrate every effort ofb the defense team aimed at giving him fair trial.

“We are not under any illusion that the British Government has taken notice of the highlights in the Presidential Media Chat granted by President Muhammadu Buhari on December 29, 2015, prominent among his worrisome but most prejudicial comments in the said media chat, is his insistence, that Ksanu cannot be granted bail by any court, and the President in the reference media chat, referred him as a flight risk for possessing dual citizenship.

“It is the position of our law that dual citizenship is a constitutional right of the citizen of Nigeria, clearly provided for under section 28 of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria as amended 2011. Dual citizenship is not a crime under our law.

“Our reservation on the President’s comment was underpinned by the findings made in the ruling delivered on February 29, 2016,   Justice John Tsoho, where in our client and two other defendants were denied bail.

“The learned Judge, in advancing his reasons for arriving at the decision, and in consistence with the direction conveyed in the aforesaid media chat, specifically referred Mr. Kanu as flight risk, on grounds of his dual citizenship, and on the basis of which he denied him bail.

“We therefore submit most respectfully that by virtue of the powers conferred on the President in the cited law, the President, and Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces ofbthe Federal Republic of Nigeria, President Muhammadu Buhari has overriding control over the appointment of the Federal High Court Judges.

“The judge in denying Mr. Kanu bail granted accelerated hearing of the substantive charge, the order connotes total annihilation of all forms of delay in the trial intended to debilitate the tenets of fair hearing, also instructive to mention, the court is under duty to allow the defendants unfettered access to relevant materials and facilities that will aid them in the defense of their case.

“However in the course of our defense we are usually confronted with situation where we are handed the short end of the stick in the face of deliberate refusal and delay in obliging us copies of the Ruling delivered in open Court, contrary to the provision of the 1999 Constitution which allows a Court or Tribunal only seven days in a criminal trial, to keep records of the proceeding, Ruling and Judgment delivered, within which, it shall be made available to the accused person(s) or person applying through him,”

IPOB lawyer further stated that it is disheartening that their successive application for the certified true copies of Ruling delivered by the Court on 9th February 2016, February 19 and March 7, 2016 have not received any attention, either by deliberate design or omission, the Rulings are still being shielded from them up till date.

“It is more painful when it comes to mind that these Rulings are not only fundamental but necessary to successful transmission of records of the Court to the Appellate Court, the court has always been served with copies of our Notices of Appeal, anytime an application for the certified true copy of the Ruling is submitted, which ordinarily would have spurred it for expeditious action, but the reverse is usually the case.

“On the face of this frustration, the defense is confronted with apparent dilemma in offering Mr. Kanu the best legal services he deserve, in defense of the bogus charges preferred against him. The application brought by the Federal government requesting the court to protect the identities of prosecution witnesses by the aid of facial masks and screens while giving evidence in the course of the proceedings was heard on February 19, 2016 and upon the hearing and our objection, the court declined to grant and consequently ordered that the hearing of the matter should be conducted in the open, and members of the public and the press were also ordered by the court to continue to participate in the proceedings.

The IPOB lawyer expressed shock that on March 7, 2016 when the trial was scheduled to commence, the Director of Public Prosecution orally applied that the subsisting order of the court made on February 19,  this year be varied, and insisted that the prosecution witnesses have refused to attend court to give evidence unless their identities are shielded from the public, and on the strength of the application and despite our vehement opposition to the application the court made a volte-face and proceeded to grant their request by varying the order it made.

“It is therefore, our humble expectation that the demonstration of palpable commitment by the British Government will to a large extent neutralize the concerns and fear raised by the remark under reference.”