Incarcerated leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), lNnamdi Kanu, has explained why he wants governors, ministers and former military chiefs among notable personalities he listed as witnesses in his terrorism case.

The IPOB leader, whose no-case submission was dismissed by Justice James Omotosho, is due to open his defence on the trial.

Ministers Nyesom Wike (FCT), David Umahi (Works),  former Army chiefs Gen. Theophilus Danjuma and Gen. Tukur Buratai are among the 23 witnesses whose names were frontloaded by the IPOB leader.

Also listed as witnesses are Imo State Governor Hope Uzodinma, Lagos State Governor Babajide Sanwo-Olu, former Abia State Governor Okezie Ikpeazu, former Attorney General of the Federation, Abubakar Malami, Director-General of the Director of State Service (DSS) Oluwatosin Ajayi, his predecessor, Yusuf Bichi, and former Director General of the National Intelligence Agency (NIA) Ahmed Rufai Abubakar.

In a document filed on Wednesday, which he personally signed, Kanu prayed the court to extend the six days earlier granted him to conduct his defence to 90 days.

Justice Omotosho at the last hearing, granted his request for a private meeting with his team of lawyers on October 22 in the courtroom of the Federal High Court in Abuja, preparatory for today’s commencement of his defence.

In the document, Kanu categorised his witnesses into two: “ordinary, but material defence witnesses (voluntary) and “material and vital witnesses (to be summoned under Section 232 of the Evidence Act 2011).”

He also indicated his intention to testify in person.

According to the document, Kanu said he plans to call Wike “to testify on the Obigbo Massacre, following the EndSARS protests and the role of security forces under his authority.”

He said Uzodinma is “to testify on public statements, following Ahmed Gulak’s death and subsequent clarification exonerating IPOB.”

Kanu said he would be inviting Gen. Danjuma “to testify on his 2018 public warning, urging self-defence against infiltrated armed forces, contextualizing the defendant’s advocacy for self-defence.”

He said Buratai would “testify on the 2017 invasion of the defendant’s residence and the chain of command authorizing the military operation.”

Kanu said Sanwo-Olu will “testify on the findings of the Lagos State EndSARS Judicial Panel, particularly the Lekki Toll-Gate massacre, evidencing state patter of repression.”

Umahi is scheduled “to testify regarding the proscription of IPOB without judicial order and its consequences,” while Ikpeazu will “testify on his knowledge and administrative participation In the 2017 military invasion within Abia State.”

Kanu wants Malami “to testify on directives and authorizations connected with the defendant’s extraordinary rendition from Kenya in June 2021.”

Also, Ajayi is being invited “to clarify on his pubic lectures and statements on terrorists and invaders, relevant to interpreting the defendant’s own broadcasts.”

Kanu said Bichi should “testify on knowledge and authorization of rendition operations, custody conditions, and compliance with legal procedures.”

He said Abubakar is expected” to testify on the operational and diplomatic coordination of the rendition.”

Kanu said a DSS official, whose name he failed to disclose, will be invited “to be cross-examined regarding direct involvement in the defendant’s abduction and illegal transfer, fabrication of witness statements, and custodial abuses.”

Those he listed as ordinary witnesses include Chief Emeka Umeagbalasi, who he described as an “expert in political history and self-determination.”

According to the document, Umeagbalasi “will testify on the historical and legal context of self-determination movements (such as IPOB) and their treatment under Nigerian and international law, including extra-judicial killings of the defendant’s associates.”

Mazi Benjamin Madubugwu,  an”associate of the defendant and former co-accused” is expected to “testify to the internal structure and objectives of IPOB, refuting claims that it is a terrorist organization.”

Chief Dan Ulasi, a community leader in Umuahia, Abia State, is being invited to “testify on the perception of the defendant’s broadcasts as political commentary rather than incitement.”

Bruce Fein, described as an international human rights and constitutional lawyer, based in Washington, D.C., United States, would “testify on the illegality of the defendant’s extraordinary rendition and its implications for jurisdiction and fair trial.”

Emeritus Professor Martin Aghaji, who Kanu said is his “treating physician,” is to “testify on the defendant’s medical condition, effects of detention, and fitness to stand trial.”

Barry Sutton, a “digital-security expert at the Massachussets Institute of Technology, Massachussets MA, USA, would “examine the integrity of the electronic evidence, including chain of custody, authenticity, and tampering issues.”

Chief Godwin I. Chionye, described as a “senior lawyer and community elder”  from Isiama Afaraukwu Ibeku Umuahia, Abia State, is to “testify on the defendant’s good character and standing in his community.”

Prince Emmanuel Kanu of No. 1 Eze Okwu-Kanu Close, Umuahia, Abia State, described as an “eyewitness to the 2017 military invasion of the defendant’s residence,” is expected to “testify to the events, casualties, and use of excessive force by the army.”

Kanu said he will, in his testimony, provide “a sworn account of the facts, denying the allegations, and explaining the political context of his statements and actions.”

Part of the document reads: “Notice of number and names of witnesses to be called by the defendant and request for witness summons/subpoena and the variation of the time within which to defend the counts/charges against the defendant.

“Take notice that pursuant to the order of this honourable court made on the 16th day of October 2025, directing the defendant to commence his defence on the 24th day of October 2025, the defendant shall call a total of twenty three (23) witnesses, divided into two categories, viz:

*Category A – ordinary, but material defence witnesses (voluntary).

*Category B – vital and compellable witnesses (to be summoned under Section 232 of the Evidence Act, 2011).

“Given the materiality of the prospective evidence of the witnesses slated for the defence of the defendant, the time frame within which the defendant is ordered to present and conduct defence of the charges appears grossly inadequate, hence your lordship is urged to vary the timeframe and accommodate at least a period of 90 days for the defence.

“The Registrar of the of the court be ordered to issue subpoenas or witness summons on Category B witnesses or be permitted

“The defendant respectfully prays this honourable court to issue all necessary summonses and witness warrants under Sections 241-242 of the Evidence Act, 2011 and under the inherent jurisdiction

“The defendant undertakes to provide the sworn statements of all voluntary witnesses to this honourable court and to notify the prosecution within a reasonable time.

“The honourable court to note that the appearance of these witnesses is essential to ensuring a fair and complete determination of the issues before the court and the honourable court and the entirety of Nigeria will enjoy the robust evidence that would surface.

“No precious time of the honourable court would be delayed and it would interest the honourable court and the general public that justice is not only done but manifestly seen to have been done.”

Experts have warned that green card holders now face a tougher path to United States citizenship, as a new civics test demanding higher scores came into effect Monday.

“The changes to the naturalization test could make passage more difficult for some test takers,” Julia Gelatt, associate director of the U.S. Immigration Program at the Migration Policy Institute, told Newsweek:

The new test comes amid the Trump administration’s efforts to tighten the U.S. immigration system, with applicants seeking citizenship now facing increased scrutiny in the form of community interviews, and the federal government looking out for whether immigrants show they hold American values and are of good moral character.

Starting October 20, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) will require all applicants for U.S. citizenship to take the updated 2025 Naturalization Civics Test. The revised exam is designed to evaluate applicants’ knowledge of U.S. history and government more thoroughly, and those filing Form N-400 on or after this date will also undergo moral character assessments.

Applicants who submit their applications before October 20 will follow the previous testing guidelines.

Under the previous 2008 Naturalization Civics Test, applicants must answer 6 out of 10 questions correctly, according to USCIS.

These 10 questions are randomly selected from a pool of 100. The upcoming 2025 Naturalization Civics Test will expand the question pool to 128 and require applicants to answer 12 of 20 questions correctly to pass.

The new question set combines items from both the 2008 and 2020 tests. The exam remains pass/fail, and a USCIS officer will continue asking questions until a pass or fail determination can be made.

Applicants aged 65 and older who have been legal permanent residents for at least 20 years will take a modified version of the test. This version includes 10 questions randomly chosen from a bank of 20, drawn from the 2008 and 2020 tests.

Some answers on the civics test may change over time due to federal or state elections, judicial appointments, or updates to laws.

“In the past, experts have advised that the naturalization test be carefully designed and tested to ensure that it is measuring what it is meant to measure,” Gelatt said. “That has not yet happened. Without assessment, it is not clear that the test that was in place was failing to properly measure knowledge of U.S. civics, or that the new test will do a better job.”

Under the new rules, not all 20 questions may need to be asked. The questioning will stop once an applicant has either answered 12 questions correctly, meeting the passing threshold, or answered 9 questions incorrectly, therefore failing the test.

Applicants are allowed to retake the test if they do not pass on their first attempt. However, failing the test twice will result in the denial of their citizenship application.

The question pool has also been expanded to cover more challenging topics related to U.S. history, government, and national symbols.

A version of the updated civics test was initially introduced during President Donald Trump’s first term. Under former President Joe Biden, USCIS returned to the 2008 version of the test.

Green card holders face revocation if eligibility or legal issues are identified. The Trump administration has targeted green card holders and applicants with criminal histories as part of their mass deportation plans.

What people are saying

Julia Gelatt, associate director of the U.S. Immigration Program at the Migration Policy Institute, told Newsweek: “This new test is also being implemented as the Trump administration has pulled back funding for English and civics education, and is seeking to reduce future funding, which will make it harder for some noncitizens to prepare for the test. And it is happening while other changes are being made to the naturalization process, including a requirement that naturalization applicants provide evidence that they have ‘good moral character,’ and the reimplementation of neighborhood checks for some applicants. Taken all together, it seems likely that a smaller share of naturalization applicants will be successful going forward.”

USCIS spokesperson Matthew Tragesser said in a statement: “American citizenship is the most sacred citizenship in the world and should only be reserved for aliens who will fully embrace our values and principles as a nation. By ensuring only those aliens who meet all eligibility requirements, including the ability to read, write, and speak English and understand U.S. government and civics, are able to naturalize, the American people can be assured that those joining us as fellow citizens are fully assimilated and will contribute to America’s greatness. These critical changes are the first of many.”

Doris Meissner, a senior fellow at the Migration Policy Institute and former director of the U.S. Immigration Service, told Newsweek in September: “The way in which they’re explaining why they’re doing this, really casts doubt on people’s eligibility. It suggests that people applying for naturalization are somehow either not eligible or have questionable intent for naturalizing or it needs to be clearly established that they will be good Americans.”

Leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPoB), Nnamdi Kanu, has concluded a private consultation with his legal team, led by former Attorney General of the Federation (AGF), Kanu Agabi (SAN).

Kanu, who was brought to court by officials of the Department of State Services (DSS), met with members of his legal team in a courtroom vacated for him by Justice James Omotosho.

The meeting was held in the Court 7, located on the second floor of the Federal High Court headquarters complex in Abuja, the same courtroom where his ongoing terrorism trial is being conducted.

Reports said that the schedule of proceedings in the case, issued by Justice James Omotosho on September 16, the meeting is part of the defence team’s preparation for the commencement of the defendant’s case on Thursday, October 23.

Justice Omotosho, on October 16, granted Kanu six consecutive days, beginning from October 23, to open and close his defence in view of the accelerated hearing earlier granted in the case.

Agabi, who did not object to the six days granted by the court, however applied orally for the court to grant Kanu’s legal team an opportunity for a private consultation session with the defendant, outside the premises of the Department of State Services (DSS).

Agabi said the defendant’s legal team was afraid that its consultation with him (Kanu) could be taped or recorded by the DSS.

Justice Omotosho granted the request and also acceded to Agabi’s request that the private meeting with Kanu be held in the courtroom, during which only the defendant and his lawyers would be present.

By the court’s directive, the private consultation meeting was to hold within the courtroom between 9:00 am and 12 noon on October 22, while the trial will resume on October 23, when Kanu is to open his defence.