Supreme Court ruling okay by Kanu, says lawyer

Counsel for the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Ifeanyi Ejiofor, has said the group’s leader Mazi Nnamdi Kanu was not disappointed by the December 15 Supreme Court ruling.

The high court reversed the October 13, 2022 decision of the Court of Appeal discharging and acquitting Kanu in the case of treasonable felony brought against him by the Federal Government.

A five-member panel, presided over by Justice Kudirat Kekere-ekun, held that the Court of Appeal was wrong to have discharged and acquitted Kanu.

The Court of Appeal had hinged its decision on the ground that the Federal Government acted illegally in the manner the IPOB leader was brought back from Kenya to face trial after jumping bail.

In the lead judgment written by Justice Mohammed Lawal Garba, but read by Justice Emmanuel Agim, the Supreme Court held that although Kanu was illegally brought back from Kenya, his trial was not illegal.

The Supreme Court held that under Nigerian law, evidence obtained through the violation of the right of an accused person to privacy and an illegal search is valid before the court.

Ejiofor said despite the ruling, the IPOB leader still believed in the rule of law and that justice would be served eventually.

Speaking to reporters at the Obi Ezumeru Palace where he was conferred with a chieftaincy title along with 27 other dignitaries, Ejiofor reiterated that Kanu accepted the court’s verdict not because the court is perfect, but because he respects its final decision.

He said: “My client was not traumatised nor shaken by the judgment. We still believe in the rule of law and that justice will eventually be served. We’re not shaken.

“We’ll be applying for his bail to be reinstated, in line with the Supreme Court pronouncement.

“Trial is a very long process. The establishment of such a case takes a very rigorous process. But we’re ready for them.

“Meanwhile, he’s undergoing a very serious medical treatment, which is a reason he will apply to be granted bail.

“He needs to be taken care of because it’s only the living that can stand trial. If he is not properly taken care of, he could die and that will be the end of the case.

“What we’ll ask the court for is to grant him bail, especially when the Supreme Court has condemned the revocation of his bail.

“One obvious thing is that the matter has taken a political dimension and if you critically assess the ruling, you’ll appreciate it was political judgment.

“I’m still at a loss how they arrived at that conclusion even after the Supreme Court practically resolved all matters we raised in our appellate brief in our favour.

“But we’re not worried. We understand the interest. Justice can only be delayed, but not denied.”

SOOURCE: THE NATION