Leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Nnamdi Kanu, has vehemently opposed the Federal Government’s request to reopen his trial, firmly insisting on the removal of Justice Binta Nyako from presiding over his case. This stance was disclosed by Kanu’s lead counsel, Aloy Ejimakor, in a post shared on X on Tuesday.
According to Ejimakor, Justice Nyako’s prior decision to recuse herself from the case remains valid and binding. “Our stance is unequivocal—Justice Nyako issued an enrolled order recusing herself on September 24, 2024. To this day, that order stands unchallenged and has not been overturned by any competent judicial authority,” Ejimakor stated emphatically.
The prosecution, however, has been accused by Kanu’s legal team of attempting to mislead the judiciary. Ejimakor reiterated that, as of September 24, 2024, Kanu no longer has a pending case before Justice Nyako.
Kanu, facing seven counts of alleged treasonable felony and terrorism, has maintained his innocence throughout. His journey through the legal and correctional system has been tumultuous. First arrested in October 2015 upon his return to Nigeria from the United Kingdom, Kanu was detained at the Kuje correctional facility before being granted bail in 2017 on health grounds. However, following a military raid on his residence, he fled the country, only to be rearrested in Kenya in 2021 and repatriated to Nigeria.
During the most recent court session on September 24, 2024, Kanu demanded that Justice Nyako step aside, citing an erosion of trust in her impartiality. Justice Nyako complied, forwarding the case to the Chief Judge of the Federal High Court for reassignment. Nevertheless, the Chief Judge returned the matter to Justice Nyako, reasoning that she was best positioned to conclude the case, having overseen it since its inception in 2015. This decision was accompanied by a directive for Kanu to formally file a motion if he wished to persist in his request for her withdrawal.
Despite this procedural mandate, the Federal Government, through its counsel Adegboyega Awomolo (SAN), sought a new trial date via a letter to the Deputy Chief Registrar of the Federal High Court on December 5, 2024. Awomolo contended that the Chief Judge’s directive effectively reinstated Justice Nyako as the trial judge.
Kanu, during court proceedings, personally voiced his mistrust, stating, “My Lord, I have lost confidence in this court. I respectfully request your recusal as you have failed to adhere to the Supreme Court’s decision. While it is regrettable when security agencies disregard court orders, it is far more concerning when a court itself fails to honor the highest judicial authority.”
In response, Awomolo urged the court to dismiss Kanu’s objections, asserting they lacked substantive merit. “My Lord, the defendant’s claims regarding the Supreme Court’s decision are baseless and should not form the foundation for your recusal. We implore you to proceed with this matter,” Awomolo argued.
However, Kanu stood firm, presenting what he described as evidence of the Supreme Court’s judgment that cast doubt on the trial court’s impartiality. He clarified that his objection was not personal but rooted in his frustration with a trial process he deemed unconstitutional.
Ultimately, Justice Nyako reaffirmed her decision to recuse herself, declaring, “I hereby step down from this matter and remit the case file to the Chief Judge for further directives.”
