The Supreme Court has fixed December 15 to deliver judgement on the appeal filed by the embattled leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra, IPOB, Nnamdi Kanu.
Kanu had appealed before the court to compel the Federal Government to release him from detention.
A five member panel judges headed by Justice Kudirat Kekere-Ekun, okayed the matter for judgement, after both the IPOB and FG counsel adopted their final briefs of argument.
While FG was represented by a team of lawyers that were led by an Acting Director, Civil Appeals at the Federal Ministry of Justice, T. A. Gazzali, SAN, Kanu’s legal team was led by a former Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Kanu Agabi, SAN.
One of the Kanu’s legal consel, Prof. Mike Ozehkome, SAN, prayed the court to order his immediate release from detention, and equally award “very heavy and punitive cost” against FG.
“We urge my lords to uphold our Cross-Appeal in order to do substantial justice to this matter and to the Respondent who has been in detention since June 29, 2021, even after the lower court ordered his release and that he should never be prosecuted again on the same counts. They are still holding him unconstitutionally. We pray my lords to deliver justice and use this case, just like in Ojukwu Vs State, to demonstrate that no man or government should be above the law,” Ozehkome, SAN, pleaded
Also, in his submission, Gazzali, SAN, the
FG’s lawyer urged the apex court to uphold the amended brief of argument he filed on May 3, 2023.
He prayed the court to allow FG’s appeal, set-aside the judgement of the Court of Appeal which ordered Kanu’s release, and order the resumption of his trial before the Federal High Court in Abuja on terrorism related charges.
CRUX NEWS recalls that the Abuja Court of Appeal had on October 13, 2022, ordered Kanu’s release from detention. And quashed a 15-count terrorism charge that FG entered against him before the Federal High Court in Abuja .
However, dissatisfied with the judgement, FG took the matter before the Supreme Court. It further persuaded the appellate court to suspend the execution of the judgement, pending the determination of its appeal.
