The trial judge and prosecuting lawyer in the high-profile terrorism case against Nnamdi Kanu have distanced themselves from the defendant’s proposal to explore reconciliation procedures.
Kanu, leader of the proscribed Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) group, is facing a seven-count amended charge of terrorism, treasonable felony and related offences before the Federal High Court in Abuja.
At Wednesday’s court session, Kanu’s lawyer, Alloy Ejimakor, stated that his client wants the court to invoke Section 17 of the Federal High Court Rules, which provides for “reconciliation” and facilitation of amicable settlement in criminal or civil cases.
However, both Justice Binta Nyako, the presiding judge, and Adegboyega Awomolo, SAN, the prosecuting counsel, made it clear that it was not within their jurisdiction to decide on aiding Kanu’s reconciliation plan.
Awomolo revealed that when Ejimakor had previously raised the proposal, he advised the defense lawyer to take it up with the Attorney-General of the Federation’s office, which has the power to negotiate.
Justice Nyako echoed Awomolo’s stance, stating that the court’s role is to determine cases, not act as a solicitor for either party. She said there was no problem if the defense wished to discuss negotiation with the AGF’s office.
Earlier, Ejimakor informed the court of two applications he had filed – one seeking committal of the DSS Director General for allegedly disobeying a court order, and another challenging the court’s jurisdiction to further try Kanu on the pending charges.
The judge observed that both applications were not in the court’s file and could not be entertained at this time.
The matter has been adjourned until September 25 for further proceedings.
