Again, Court declines Nnamdi Kanu bail

A Federal High Court sitting in Abuja on Thursday has again declined the Leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra, Nnamdi Kanu and three others bail as they might jump trial.

Nnamdi Kanu who is standing trial alongside Benjamin Maudubugwu and David Nwabuisi for alleged treason before Justice James Tsoho has now been transferred to a new Judge to look in to the matter.

Justice Tsoho withdrawal followed the defendant accusation alleging that the Judge was been biased and therefore he had no confidence in him any longer.

The presiding Judge, Justice Binta Nyako  had adjourned  the trial for today for ruling on the bail application by Nnamdi Kanu and three others.

Recall that, in a ruling dated 29th January, 2016, Justice John Tsoho upheld that, for the defendant (Kanu) to have revealed that he had dual Citizenship from both Nigeria and Britain shows every possibility of him escaping Justice.

“The constitutions specify that the security of the land is above any right of any individual and he is also a treat to the security of the Nation” Tsoho said

The defendants counsel, Ifeanyi Ejiofor had on 17th November, 2016 filed a bail application for the defendants.

At the resumed trial, Justice Nyako upheld that the court has the jurisdiction on whether or not to grant the first defendant bail irrespective of the charges levelled against him even though most of the charges are however serious in nature which could lead to a life sentence if found guilty.

Adding that, the defense counsel has actually not convinced her enough to do grant them bail, she therefore declined the bail application filed by Kanu’s lawyer and orderd for speedy hearing on the matter.

Taking a swift on the case, the prosecuting counsel, shuaibu Mohammed filed an application asking for its witnesses to be protected and shielded from members of the public.

The prosecution appealed to the court to allow them give their witness evidence behind the screens even as they are expected to use pseudo names.

The defense counsel countered the application and said it shouldn’t be granted.

The matter was therefore adjourned to 13th December, 2016 for ruling on the application for masked witnesses.

Subscribe to our mailing list and get interesting stuff and updates to your email inbox.