The leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra, Mazi Nnamdi Kanu, has written to the Chief Justice of Nigeria seeking his intervention to re-assign his terrorism charges to another trial judge....Read Full Article >>➤
Kanu’s case was before Justice Binta Nyako of the Federal High Court, Abuja, until Kanu demanded her recusal, claiming loss of confidence in his trial. Kanu’s appeal was contained in a letter to the CJN, signed by his Special Counsel, Barr Aloy Ejimakor, and made available to THE WHISTLER on Wednesday in Enugu.
Entitled “Re: Request for your Lordship’s intervention in FHC/Abj/CR/383/2025 (Federal Republic of Nigeria v. Mazi Nnamdi Kanu)”, Kanu requested the Lordship’s “prompt administrative intervention directing the Chief Judge of the Federal High Court to abide by the law and assign this case for trial to a court that possesses the requisite jurisdiction”.
Ejimakor recalled that the case commenced in 2015 and was pending trial before Honourable Justice Binta Murtala-Nyako until 24th September 2024 when the trial judge, pursuant to Kanu’s request, recused herself from presiding over the trial.
He stated that Kanu’s request for the said recusal was propelled by his apprehension of bias, stemming from several pronouncements made against him by the recused judge, including Justice Nyako’s refusal to restore his bail despite the pronouncement of the Honorable Supreme Court against her prior to the revocation of Kanu’s bail and in which same judgement the apex Court had also stated that the ‘impartiality of the said recused judge has become suspect’.
He added that Kanu also wrote to the court on 5th December 2024, when the complainant requested that the case be re-listed for trial before the recused judge.
According to Ejimakor, “We countered with a reply, opposing the re-listing or reassignment of the case to the same judge because the order of recusal – being extant and subsisting – legally barred her from presiding over the trial or has otherwise ousted the jurisdiction of that particular court.”
He said to the chagrin of Kanu’s legal team, on 10th February 2025, Kanu was summoned to appear for trial before the same judge, adding that Kanu had – on 14th January 2025 – filed a complaint against the said recused judge before the National Judicial Council and the said complaint is still pending.
Quoting him, “Thus, on the said 10th February 2025, we – out of our abiding respect for the sanctity of the court – appeared under protest before the recused judge, whereupon the said court entered an order of adjournment sine die.”
Citing related court verdicts, Ejimakor submitted that, “Once a judge voluntarily recuses himself, the immediate legal consequence is that such a judge is disqualified from further proceedings in the matter. A judge’s unilateral return to a case after recusal will surely create a public perception of partiality, thus eroding the much-cherished public confidence in the courts.”
The legal team therefore prayed the Chief Judge of Nigeria to invoke his administrative powers as the head of the judiciary in Nigeria to “halt this gross miscarriage to the defendant and direct the Chief Judge of the Federal High Court to reassign this case to another judge in the Abuja Division of the Federal High Court or any of the divisions in Southeast Nigeria.” ...Read Full Article >>➤