By Mazi Onyebuchi Eze (Nnamdi Kanu Disciple)
For Family Writers
As the court case of 11 count charges preferred against Mazi Nnamdi Kanu De Great, the supreme leader of Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Mazi Chidiebere Onwudiwe, Mazi Benjamin Mmadubugwu and Mazi David Nwawuisi, all who are human right activists, which took place on March 1, 2017 in Federal High court Abuja has come, gone and adjourned to March 20th for another sitting, there matters arising from the general overview of the court sitting of March 1st. Matters arising from the court sitting under reference is that:
(1) The court presided over by Justice Binta Nyako quashed 6 out of the original 11 count charges of the plaintiff citing insufficient evidence.
(2) The court presided over by Justice Binta Nyako ruled that IPOB (Indigenous People of Biafra) is not unlawful. This put to rest the gullibility of Nigerians even their so called legal practitioners who ignorantly believed that IPOB is unlawful society just because it was not registered in Nigeria.
(3) The court presided over by Justice Binta Nyako refused to give the 1st defendant (Nnamdi Kanu) chance to say that which nobody know what is in his mind he want to say. The trial judge furiously said that should Nnamdi Kanu talk further, the court will designate him as ‘unrule’ and suspend him from further court attendance.
(4) The court presided over by Justice Binta Nyako watched the lawless DSS officers refused to obey the court order of allowing journalists to pass easily into court room since the proposed secret has been overruled.
All these matters arising from March 1 court sitting aside to be discussed by the judicial analysts in the land. My area of concern is the declaration of the trial Judge Justice Binta Nyako about the available evidence of the plaintiff. People all over the world should recalled that the trial Judge Binta Nyako put it before the court that the only evidence made available before the court by the prosecution counsel is the radio broadcast of the first defendant from far away London in diverse dates.
Now, permit me to ask the honourable court, “if it is only a radio broadcast made in the foreign land outside the jurisdiction of the honourable court is the substance or evidence to prove a grave accusation like committing treason or treasonable felony, is it not better for the court to quash the remaining 5 count charges which are only duplication of the already quashed 6 charges except count #4 which borders on alleged defamation of Character of one Rtd Major General Muhammadu Buhari, which is said to have taken place on or about 28/4/2015? It should be a rape to legal and judicial procedures to state that the only evidence tendered before court to convince the court on a grave accusation of treasonable felony on the accused person is a mere radio broadcast made from a foreign nation.
The world is very interested in this case between Nigeria government and Nnamdi Kanu, the leader of IPOB because his broadcast is always anchored on the desire of vast population of Biafra people to restore the relinquished sovereignty of Biafra. How come that the broadcast of the collective will of the majority of the people of Biafra is now an exhibit for substantiating treasonable felony on the leader of the people? Therefore, the only thing that will settle the lingering issue of Biafra tagged as treasonable is the unconditional release of Nnamdi Kanu and his co accused persons and recommendation of referendum to Nigeria government which the court is part of solution to the Biafra question. The world is expecting nothing at the moment from the court than to quash the remaining charges because they are all baseless. If the trial Judge fails to quash the remaining charges, it will be tantamount siding injustice against the innocent. A word is enough for the wise!
