The State Security Service, SSS, failed to produce Nnamdi Kanu, the leader of the proscribed Indigenous People of Biafra, IPOB, at the Federal High Court on Monday, as the judge adjourned trial to October 21.
The trial was stalled not just because of Mr Kanu’s absence from court, but also because the judges of the court began their vacation on Monday, the trial judge, Binta Nyako, said.
Earlier, the prosecuting lawyer, M. B Abubakar, had reportedly excused Kanu’s absence in court to ‘logistical’ difficulties by the SSS, the agency holding him in custody.
But this claim by the prosecution was swiftly countered by Mr Kanu’s lawyer, Ifeanyi Ejiofor, who said the IPOB leader had been moved out of Abuja.
It remains unclear why the SSS failed to produce him in court on Monday, as the operatives of the spy agency had taken over the premises and the adjoining roads much earlier before the proceedings started at about 11.10a.m.
Meanwhile, the leader of the proscribed Indigenous People of Biafra, Nnamdi Kanu, has taken the Federal Government of Nigeria and the Kenyan Government to the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights based in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, over the alleged violation of his fundamental human rights by the two governments.
Kanu, through one of his lawyers, Aloy Ejimakor, also demanded to be returned to the United Kingdom.
Ejimakor, in a statement on Monday titled, ‘Re: Mazi Nnamdi Kanu’, said the IPOB leader demanded accountability over his extradition to Nigeria from Kenya.
According to Ejimakor, “Jurisdiction lies with the Commission because Nigeria and Kenya are State Parties to the African Charter; and Nigeria even took a step further to domesticate the Charter, thus making it part of her municipal laws.
“Both countries also have extradition laws that prohibit this sort of reprehensible conduct that saw Kanu to Nigeria.
“More particularly, extraordinary rendition is expressly prohibited under the African Charter, where It provides in pertinent part that “A State may not transfer (e.g. deport, expel, remove, extradite) an individual to the custody of another State unless it is prescribed by law and in accordance with due process and other international human rights obligations. Extraordinary rendition, or any other transfer, without due process, is prohibited”.
“A victim of extraordinary rendition is entitled to remedies mandated by the Charter.
“Therefore, among many other reliefs, I requested that Kanu be restored to his state of being before the rendition, which state of being was that he travelled to Kenya on his British passport and was duly admitted as such and as a free man.
“Further, that no valid territorial jurisdiction can issue from an act of extraordinary rendition because Kanu is, technically speaking, still in Kenya.
“And that the Nigerian bench warrant standing against Kanu is, in the absence of any successful extradition proceedings in Kenya, invalid to arrest in Kenya.
“I also requested the Commission to adopt other urgent measures as the Commission sees fit in the circumstances to protect Nnamdi Kanu in the interim. A fact-finding visitation to Nigeria is also in reckoning.”
Kanu, who was granted bail in April 2017, fled the country after the invasion of his home in Afara-Ukwu, near Umuahia, Abia State, by the military in September of that year.
Mr Kanu, a holder of the British passport was rearrested in a foreign land and brought back to Nigeria in June, 2021.
Presented in court on June 29, to continue his trial the judge had ordered Mr Kanu to be remanded in SSS custody.