The Federal High in Abuja, on Friday, overruled a no-case submission filed by Nnamdi Kanu, leader of the proscribed Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), saying he has a case to answer in the alleged terrorism trial.
Justice James Omotosho, in a ruling, held that the Department of State Services (DSS) has made out a prima facie case against Kanu for him to enter his defence in the case.
The judge held that the evidence presented by the DSS, through its five witnesses, were such that there was the need for the IPOB leader to provide some explanations in the offences with which he was charged.
He said: “I have carefully gone through the evidence presented to the court by the prosecution with respect to this charge.
“The evidence all point to the establishment of a prima facie case against the defendant (Kanu).
“The evidence is such that the defendant must proffer some explanations or defence to the allegation made against him, especially considering the seriousness of the offences as they are such that the life of the defendant is at stake.”
According to him, the court will refrain from evaluating the evidence but will limit itself to stating that on the whole, a prima facie case of engaging in terrorist activities has been made out against the defendant.
“This is not to say that the defendant is guilty as charged but simply that he be afforded his right to fair hearing and put in his defence before this court.
“The evidence of the prosecution (DSS) has founded sufficient ground for proceeding with this trial.
“A connection of the defendant with the offences, no matter how slight, constitutes prima facie evidence and as such the defendant would be required to enter his defence to the charge or a rebuttal of some sort,” he said.
According to the judge, I must say here that holding that a prima facie case has been established does not necessarily imply that the court finds the defendant guilty of the charge.
“It is simply to allow the defendant exhaust his options for his defence and to clear every unresolved issue which may weigh on the mind of the court in reaching a final decision.
“The defendant is still presumed innocent until proven guilty and the prosecution still has the duty to prove the charge beyond reasonable doubt,” Justice Omotosho said, citing Section 135 (1) of the Evidence Act, 2011, to back the ruling.
Ruling on the argument that the the court lacked jurisdiction to entertain the case as a result of the alleged extraordinary rendition, the judge held that no evidence of extraordinary rendition had been placed before the court.
“It is when such evidence relating to extraordinary rendition of the defendant is given on oath that the issue of jurisdiction relating to it can be considered by this court.
“Laws are not based on evidence that are not placed before the court.
“The right of a defendant to defend himself/herself is a fundamental right provided under Section 36 of the 1999 Constitution (as amended).
“Such right cannot be taken from a defendant except where a defendant expressly or by conduct waives same.
“This defendant, having not waived his right to defend himself either expressly or by conduct, and the no-case submission made by him, having been overruled, he is hereby called upon to put in his defence to the charge against him.
“The address of counsel, no matter how beautifully constructed, cannot take the place of evidence,” the judge ruled.
Justice Omotosho equally declined to grant Kanu’s application to be transferred to National Hospital for medical attention.
Delivering ruling on the motion filed by the IPOB leader, the judge ordered the president of the Nigerian Medical Association (NMA) to set up a panel of medical experts to ascertain Nnamdi Kanu ‘s actual health status.
The judge had held that the order became necessary considering the conflicting medical reports of Kanu presented by the prosecution and the defence.
Justice Omotosho, therefore, directed the association to submit an independent medical report to the court within eight days from the date of the ruling.
“In final analysis, the application by the defendant/applicant (Kanu) must be given due consideration.
“This court however notes the objections of the complainant.
“Thus in the interest of justice, this court will balance the interests of the parties by granting some orders to ensure fair determination of this application.
“An order is hereby made directing the president of Nigerian Medical Association (NMA) to constitute an investigating committee or panel to thoroughly investigate and consider the following:
“Inspect the Department of State Services (DSS) medical facility and consider its suitability and whether the alleged health issue of the defendant can adequately be taken care of In the said facility.
“Consider if there is need to move the defendant to the National Hospital, Abuja, if the DSS facility is discovered to be inadequate and incapable of giving the defendant adequate medical attention needed considering the nature of his medical issues or problems.”
He directed that the panel to investigate if Kanu ‘s health status is unfit to face the trial.
The judge ordered that the panel, which he said should be between eight to 10 members, should substantially be from diverse medical fields such as Cardiology, Pulmonology, Urology, Neurology or other medical areas relating to Kanu ‘s medical issues.
Justice Omotosho also ordered that the chief medical director of Abuja National Hospital or his representative must be a member of the panel, Kanu, having chose the hospital for his treatment.
He held that the panel is at liberty to use any medical facility, inclusive of the National Hospital, Abuja for the purpose of carrying out the medical investigation and findings.
“The report of this panel set up by president of NMA shall be signed by the chairman and secretary of the committee.
“This report shall be filed within eight days from September 26,” the judge ordered.
He adjourned the matter until October 8 to consider the report of the NMA.
