By Obinna Uballa
Security tension is mounting in the South East and Abuja as Nnamdi Kanu, leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), is set to learn his fate in a prolonged terrorism trial against the Federal Government.
Kanu, in the custody of the Department of State Services (DSS) since June 2021 following his controversial return from Kenya, faces seven terrorism-related charges including alleged incitement, running an unlawful group, and acts threatening national security, allegations he denies.
The Federal High Court in Abuja, presided over by Justice James Omotosho, is expected to rule on Thursday on a series of applications filed by both Kanu and the government, including the IPOB leader’s challenge to the competence of the charges and a request for release on grounds of unlawful detention.
Justice Omotosho, while fixing the date for judgment, noted that Kanu failed to open his defence despite being granted six days to do so and initially agreeing to present his case. The judge emphasised that the defendant had effectively waived his right to defence and that the court had ensured a fair hearing.
Kanu’s legal battle has been marked by appeals, adjournments, and counter-applications. In October 2022, the Court of Appeal ordered his release, citing his rendition from Kenya as unlawful, but the Supreme Court later set aside the decision, returning the case to the trial court.
Ahead of the verdict, security has been heightened in Abuja and Kanu’s hometown of Umuahia, Abia State. The state police, under Commissioner Danladi Isa, confirmed strategic deployments across the state to maintain law and order, with patrols in collaboration with other security agencies.
Meanwhile, Kanu has filed a criminal complaint before a Chief Magistrate’s Court in Abuja against two DSS witnesses, TAA and BBB, alleging that they gave “false evidence on oath” during his trial. The complaint cites multiple sections of the Penal Code, the Administration of Criminal Justice Act, and the Constitution, claiming the witnesses sought to misrepresent the chain of custody of his 2015 and 2021 statements.
Kanu accused TAA of denying knowledge of DSS officer Brown Ekwoaba, who allegedly supervised his 2015 interviews, and BBB of providing contradictory testimony about his interactions with Kanu. The IPOB leader claims both witnesses gave materially false evidence to obscure critical facts in his case.
The outcome of Thursday’s judgment is widely seen as pivotal not only for Kanu’s personal liberty but also for security and political stability in the South-East, with implications for ongoing efforts at reconciliation in the region.
