Lead counsel to the leader of the Indigenous People Of Biafra, IPOB, Chief Mike Ozekhome has told the Court of Appeal that his client is terminally ill and needs to be released as ordered by the Court.
Ozekhome was reacting to a request for adjournment made to the Court on Monday by Federal Government's attorney Mr. David Kaswe.
Kaswe had complained during the court session that he was served a counter affidavit last Friday by Kanu’s lawyer, Mike Ozekhome, and claimed that he needed time to react to a list of one additional authority served on him on Monday morning.
However, Counsel for Kanu objected to the request arguing that only one additional authority was served and the Federal Government should have no reason to seek adjournment because of a singular additional authority.
Ozekhome noted that the government has yet to obey the court decision of October 13 that ordered Kanu’s release, noting that the freedom of Kanu was being trampled upon as he was terminally ill.
The lawyer further asked the court to reject the request for any adjournment.
The presiding judge, Justice Haruna Tsanami subsequently declined to grant the request for adjournment, but rather gave the Federal Government till noon on Monday, to move its application for the stay of execution of the judgment and to respond to the fresh authority cited by Kanu’s legal team.
Nigerian Government justifies its refusal to obey the Appeal Court judgment on Kanu.
The Federal Government on Monday offered justifications for not complying with the Court of Appeal ruling that required it to free the leader of the IPOB, Mazi Nnamdi Kanu who is being held in custody.
In an affidavit it submitted in support of its request to stay the judgment's execution, the Federal Government referred to Kanu as "a flight risk person" and insisted that the case against him raises national security concerns.
Citing the decided case of the Federal Republic of Nigeria v. Asari Dokubo as an authority, the Federal Government contended that whenever a case touched on national security, the right of the aggrieved individual takes a secondary position.
“The Respondent is a flight risk person. It is important to appreciate the gamut of depositions in our application.
“One of the grounds of our application is that this matter touches on the national security of the state.
“We rely on the case of FRN Vs Dokubo, where the Supreme Court held that where national security is threatened or the likelihood of it being threatened, human rights take a secondary place.
“Once there is a threat to national security, the human rights of any individual can be suspended until such threat is taken care of.
“Once the security of the nation is in jeopardy, the individual right may not even exist”, the Federal Government argued through its lawyer, Mr. David Kaswe, an Assistant State Counsel in the office of the Attorney-General of the Federation.
It further informed the court that there was intelligence indicating that Kanu's release from custody would make the security situation in the Southeast region worse.
However, Kanu's attorney, Chief Mike Ozekhome, SAN, urged the appellate court to reject Federal Government's plea, contending that it amounted to a request for the suspension of a citizen's freedom.
“My lords, on the contrary, the release of Kanu will bring peace and tranquility to the South East in particular and the nation in general.
“This was demonstrated after the judgment of this court that ordered the release of the Respondent. Immediately after the judgment was delivered, there was so much joy and happiness in the entire South East. There was so much jubilation and merriment”, Ozekhome added.
He noted that Dokubo's situation was different from Kanu's.
According to him, the Appeal Court has already decided on Kanu's matter and ordered his release, whilst Dokubo asked for bail, pending the ruling on the charge against him.
Appeal Court reserves ruling on Federal Government's application for stay of execution.
The Appeal Court postponed deciding on the Federal Government's application for a stay of execution of the judgment discharging the IPOB leader, Nnamdi Kanu of terrorism charges.
Shortly after hearing arguments in favor and against the federal government's appeal on Monday, a three-man panel of the appellate court said that the date for its decision had been reserved and will be communicated to the parties to the lawsuit.
Igbo traditional rulers were present in court to demand Nnamdi Kanu’s release.
On Monday, six Igbo traditional leaders attended the Court of Appeal session in Abuja to call for the release of Nnamdi Kanu, the IPOB leader.
The monarchs, who were all clothed in their regal garb, said they had come to court to support their son.
The traditional rulers were HRM Eze (Sir) Innocent Nwaigwe, secretary of the Umuahia North Council of Traditional Rulers.
HRM, Eze Nnamdi Ofoegbu, Chairman of the Ohuhu Council of Traditional Leaders, Eze Iheanyichukwu Ezigbo, Chairman of the Ibeku Council, Eze Pastor Philip Ajomiwe, Immediate Past-Chairman of the Umuahia North Council, Eze Eddy Ibeabuchi, Former-Chairman of the Umuahia North Council, and Eze Ben Oriaku.
Igbo traditional leaders.
They remained in the courtroom and watched the proceedings in the Federal Government's appeal to halt the execution of the Appeal Court decision that ordered Kanu's release from custody.
Three Justices on the Appeal Court panel transferred with immediate effect.
Meanwhile, the three Justices who served on the Court of Appeal panel that overturned the 15-count terrorism charges brought by the Federal Government against the leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra, IPOB, Mazi Nnamdi Kanu have been reassigned from their separate divisions by the Court of Appeal.
The new posting for the justices was stated to be with immediate effect in a memo dated October 17 and signed by Justice Monica Dongban-Mensem, President of the Court of Appeal.
The memo also stated that the justices were expected to report to their new stations by October 21.
Jummai Hanatu Sankey, the presiding justice, who had previously been assigned to the Gombe Division of the court, has been transferred to the Awka Division. Justice Oludotun Adetope-Okojie, who delivered the lead judgment, has been assigned to Owerri, and Justice Ebiowei Tobi, the third member of the panel, has been assigned to Gombe.
Investigations by Vanguard showed that the three appellate court justices were reassigned four days after issuing the decision that released and acquitted the embattled IPOB leader.
In a unanimous ruling, the three-judge bench of the appellate court accused the Federal Government of flagrantly breaking all known laws when it forcefully extradited Kanu from Kenya to Nigeria to continue his prosecution.
It concluded that the appellant's fundamental human rights had been violated and that the extraordinary rendition, which had taken place without following due legal procedure, was a serious violation of all international conventions, treaties, protocols, and guidelines to which Nigeria is a signatory.
Furthermore, the appellate court pointed out that the Federal Government has not denied the claim that the IPOB leader was in Kenya when he was kidnapped and returned to the country without going through the extradition process.
It declared that the Federal Government was "ominously silent on the subject," which was crucial in evaluating whether the trial court would still have the authority to continue the criminal case that was before it.
The Federal Government's actions, according to the appellate court, stained the entire process it started against Kanu and constituted "an abuse of criminal prosecution in general."
"The court will never shy away from calling the Executive to order when it tilts towards Executive recklessness”, the appellate court held, even as it accused the Federal Government of engaging in “serious abuse of power”.
Politics and Opinion.
ความคิดเห็น