Justice James Omotosho of the Federal High Court has given Biafra agitator Nnamdi Kanu until November 5 to defend the terrorism charges filed against him or risk waiving his right to do so.
The judge advised Kanu to consult a criminal law expert or appoint a lawyer to handle his defence, following his continued refusal to respond to the charges.
During Tuesday’s court session, Kanu—who represented himself—insisted that there was no valid charge against him. He argued that his detention by the Department of State Services (DSS) was illegal and claimed that the court was violating the Supreme Court’s ruling that had condemned his extraordinary rendition from Kenya.
He maintained that the terrorism charges were invalid, citing Section 36(12) of the 1999 Constitution, which, according to him, does not provide for terrorism offences.
“In Nigeria today, the Constitution is the supreme law. There is no provision for terrorism offences in the Constitution. There is no valid charge against me. I will not go back to any detention today,” Kanu said.
He further argued that the Terrorism Prevention and Prohibition Act had been repealed, making it unconstitutional to try him under such a law.
Despite repeated persuasion from the court, Kanu refused to enter a defence, insisting on being shown a valid charge before proceeding.
In response, the prosecution counsel, Adegboyega Awomolo (SAN), told the court that some of Kanu’s submitted documents lacked legal value because they were unsigned and not endorsed by the court.
However, Justice Omotosho ruled that the documents on record were duly signed and accompanied by proof of payment. He then adjourned the case to November 5, giving Kanu a final opportunity to defend himself.
