By MOHAMMED DANBABA
Judge Says IPOB Leader Disrupted Proceedings Over Written Address Dispute
The tension surrounding Nnamdi Kanu’s long-running terrorism trial spiked on Thursday after Justice James Omotosho of the Federal High Court in Abuja ordered security operatives to forcefully remove the detained IPOB leader from the courtroom.
Kanu had insisted—loudly and repeatedly—that the court could not proceed with judgement unless he was allowed to file a written address. His outbursts brought proceedings to a temporary halt as security agents escorted him out.
The dramatic scene unfolded just moments after Justice Omotosho ruled on a set of fresh motions Kanu filed shortly after the matter was initially scheduled for judgement on November 7.
Judge Dismisses Fresh Motions Filed by Kanu
In his ruling, Justice Omotosho held that the latest applications raised issues that had already been fully addressed in previous motions. The court dismissed Kanu’s attempt to refer what he described as “substantial constitutional matters” to the Court of Appeal.
The judge cited Section 306 of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA) 2015, which prohibits stay of proceedings in criminal trials, stressing that the request could not be granted under existing legal provisions.
Bail Request Also Rejected
Kanu, who has been representing himself, also asked the court for bail on what he termed “liberal terms,” insisting that his prolonged detention violated his constitutional rights.
But the court declined, stating that matters raised in the bail application would be addressed during the full judgement.
Courtroom Disruption Halts Judgement Process
Trouble started when Justice Omotosho attempted to begin reading the long-awaited judgement. Kanu interrupted, demanding to know under which legal authority the court had denied him the right to present a written address.
His persistent interruptions forced the judge to stand down the proceedings and order security officers to remove him from the courtroom.
Judgement Still Pending
The high-profile case, which has run for years and attracted significant national and international attention, remains unsettled. The court did not proceed with the final judgement after the disruption, leaving uncertainty over the next steps in the trial.
The confrontation marks one of the most chaotic moments in Kanu’s ongoing legal battle as debates over jurisdiction, procedure and constitutional rights continue to dominate the courtroom.
