The Federal High Court Abuja has adjourned the bail application of Nnamdi Kanu, leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) to March 19.

Justice Binta Nyako has also scheduled the long-awaited trial of the IPOB leader for March 20.

A hearing notice dated February 8, 2023 fixed today for commencement of proceedings but Kanu’s lawyer, Alloy Ejimako asked that his bail application and preliminary objection be heard.

The Federal Government’s new lead counsel, Chief Adegboyega Awomolo told Justice Nyako that the Supreme Court affirmed her decision of April 8, 2022 which ordered that Kanu be tried on counts 1,2,3,4,5,8 and 15 of the terrorism-related charges of which the defendant has pleaded not guilty.

He told the judge that the Prosecution is interested in proceeding with the hearing of this matter till a conclusion in the interest of the nation.

Nnaemeka Ejiofor announced for Kanu but Alloy Ejimako spoke on behalf of the legal team.

Ejimako said it was quite obvious that the Supreme Court remitted the case back to the court but he had two motions – for bail and preliminary objection.

Awolowo said he will be opposing the application for bail and that he needs time to reply Kanu’s further affidavit on bail.

But Ejimako told Justice Binta Nyako that his further affidavit on bail was served same day.

The judge said the application for bail does not stop the commencement of trial.

Ejimako said if the bail application was not going to be taken, “then let everybody go home and let us respond to all issues.”

The FG’ counsel, Awolowo said he was ready to speak on the preliminary objection.

Nyako, who has ruled nine times on Kanu’s bail applications in the past, said she was not happy as to how lawyers in the matter have been handling the matter since 2015.

“This is exactly the way this case has been going since 2015. I am talking to both sides. You truncate the proceedings,” Nyako said.

Then, Awomolo rose up and told the judge he recently joined the federal government’s team as lead counsel and has done his part in responding to processes served on him.

He then added he was ready to argue the bail application.

Ejimako asked that his client be admitted to bail on the most legal terms possible.

He said there is no dispute that the IPOB leader has a serious heart condition as confirmed by federal government owned hospital.

“Our humble submission is that the medical condition of the defendant speaks for itself and the health challenge persist despite the treatment offered him by the detaining authority,” Ejimako added.

He said Kanu’s continual detention at the DSS facility threatens his life.

He added that the delay in trying Kanu was caused by the Federal Government which amended charges against the IPOB leader three times since he was extradited since 2021.

On the court’s observation that Kanu once jumped bail, Ejimako said developments that happened in the past have now become academic in view of the findings of judgements from other courts even outside Abuja.

But Awomolo urged the court to dismiss the application and in the alternative order accelerated hearing of the case, saying Section 161 of the 1999 Constitution states that the applicant must prove that there are no good medical facility by the authorities detaining him to treat him.

The senior lawyer contended that there is nothing tangible that has been brought to show that the IPOB leader is entitled to bail under the law.

He said the court had ruled that Kanu jumped bail while she revoked his bail.

“There is no evidence before the court that Kanu would not jump bail again,” Awomolo said, adding the court should refuse the application for bail.

On his preliminary objection dated February 19, Ejimako asked the court to direct that before any trial can commence, the respondents must refrain from the following; seizure of documents by lawyer, stopping lawyers from taking notes during counsels visiting to Kanu at the DSS, eavesdropping on Kanu’s conversation with Kanu and that the complainants must stop violation his client’s right.

He also sought an alternative order that before commencement of trial, a non-custodial centre be created for Kanu to engage with lawyers of his own choice.

Awomolo urged the court to dismiss the preliminary objection for being an abuse of court process and that a lawyer cannot dictate to the court how to conduct its proceedings.

He said it is an insult for Kanu’s lawyer to dictate to the court in saying unless the detaining authority acts in certain ways, trial should not commence.

He added that the complainant never breached the fundamental right of the IPOB leader.

He said the secret police has been diligent in protecting Nnamdi Kanu’s life.

After hearing the parties, Nyako fixed March 19 for bail while March 20 would be the commencement of trial.

Kanu, who was first arraigned in 2015, is facing terrorism-related charges as ordered by the Supreme Court which set aside the verdict of the Appeal Court that discharged the IPOB leader last year.

The Supreme Court had on December 15 upheld the Federal Government’s treason and terrorism charges instituted against Nnamdi Kanu.

On October 13, 2022, the Court of Appeal justices quashed all charges against Kanu, agreeing with the submissions of Mike Ozekhome, the IPOB leader’s lead counsel.

The Court of Appeal, while discharging Kanu of the 15 count charges against him, had barred the FG from trying Kanu on the charges he was facing before his forceful rendition from Kenya to Nigeria by agents of the Nigerian government on June 27, 2021.

The justices held that Kanu’s extraordinary rendition from overseas was done in violation of international laws, treaties on extradition, thereby shielding Kanu from being tried on the charges.

But the appellate court later stayed its judgment after the federal government through the office of the Attorney-General of the Federation asked that the execution of the verdict be paused in view of its application to the Supreme Court.

Reading the judgment prepared by Justice J. Garba, Justice Agim Emmanuel of the apex court held that if the police should illegally violate the right of an accused, it should not block the court from jurisdiction.

“There is no legislation that provides that a trial court will not have jurisdiction where a prosecution violates a person’s right.

“Certainly, we decided not to go with the Court of Appeal decision,” Justice Agim had said.

He said as much as the apex court strongly condemned what the prosecution did, Nigeria must protect its image through adherence to international and local law.

“The Nigerian law has not stated that the court should decline jurisdiction from trying a case even if law enforcement has violated the rights of a person,” the apex court said, allowing the appeal of the FG.