Headlines
Tribunal Orders Yakubu, REC to Produce Documents Demanded by Atiku
The five-man Presidential Election Petition Tribunal in Abuja on Wednesday ordered the Chairman of the Independent National Electoral Commission, Prof. Mahmood Yakubu, and the commission’s Resident Electoral Commissioner in Zamfara State to produce electoral documents requested by the Peoples Democratic Party and its presidential candidate, Alhaji Atiku Abubakar.
The tribunal, led by Justice Mohammed Garba, gave the order after receiving complaints by the petitioners that INEC officials had refused to comply with the court’s subpoenas served on them for the production of the documents.
He ordered INEC officials to produce the documents in court on Thursday.
But the tribunal at the end of the proceedings, following a request by the petitioners’ lawyer, Chris Uche (SAN), fixed Friday as the next hearing day.
The Wednesday’s hearing was the ninth of the 10 days given to the petitioners to present their case.
The proceedings were adjourned Wednesday after the petitioners called nine additional witnesses, making a total of 58 they had called in nine days.
The PDP and Atiku, who are the petitioners challenging the victory of President Muhammadu Buhari and the All Progressives Congress at the February 23, 2019 poll, spoke through their lawyer, Chief Chris Uche (SAN).
Before the petitioners started calling their witnesses on Wednesday, Uche informed the tribunal that INEC officials had refused to release the requested documents to the petitioners despite the fact that the fees for the certification of the documents had been paid to the commission.
“We have made concerted efforts and we stated in the letters we wrote to them that we had it on good authority that they were instructed not to release the documents,” Uche said.
Accusing both INEC chairman and the Zamfara State REC of disobedience to the summons of the court, he said that upon his clients’ applications, the court issued two subpoenas on July 9, 2019 which had been served on the two officials.
“One was upon the chairman of INEC for the production of some documents. The subpoena was issued on July 9, 2019. The documents were paid for. The subpoena was served on the same date of July 9, 2019. It was to produce documents, not to testify.
“On the same July 9, another subpoena was issued to the Resident Electoral Commissioner, INEC, in Zamfara State, Gusau, in which we applied for all the Forms EC8A (polling unit result sheets), and they refused to release them to us.
“They have not been produced and we have not seen them in court. Neither have the persons on whom the subpoenas were issued in court. We seek your lordships’ intervention,” he said.
Responding, Justice Mohammed Garba, who leads the panel, noted that the subpoenas were not served on INEC officials as claimed by the petitioners’ lawyer, but that one was served on the chairman on July 15 and the other was served on the REC, Zamfara State, on July 12.
In his reaction, INEC’s lawyer, Yunus Usman (SAN), said he and members of his legal team met with the commission’s chairman, up till 11.30pm on Tuesday but he never made mention of any subpoena.
As for the Zamfara REC, Usman said he received a text message from her indicating that the documents requested by the petitioners had been certified but the petitioners had refused to come up to make the needed payment.
Other respondents’ lawyers, Chief Wole Olanipekun (SAN) for Buhari and Lateef Fagbemi (SAN) for the All Progressives Congress, said the petitioners ought to do more by liaising with INEC’s lead counsel and ought to have made the requests for the documents earlier than last week.
But responding, Uche said, “We have made so many efforts.
“We wrote a letter addressed to the chairman of INEC on April 15, 2019 and the letter was received the same date.
“An earlier one on the same subject matter was dated April 9, 2019 was received the same date.
“We also wrote an earlier one on the same subject-matter on March 12 and it was received the same date.”
In his comments before ruling, Justice Garba noted that the legal team representing INEC in the matter owed the court the duty to ensure that the court’s orders were obeyed by their clients.
“I have seen from the record of the court that the INEC chairman and the Resident Electoral Commissioner, Zamfara State, were duly served with subpoena issued on July 9, 2019, to produce documents named therein.
“The INEC chairman and the Resident Electoral Commissioner in Zamfara and the legal team representing them are under binding obligation to ensure that the orders contained in the subpoena are obeyed.”
The Punch
Headlines
Nnamdi Kanu: Alleged Order to Bomb US, Uk Embassies, Omotosho’s ‘Manufactured Lie’ – Group
A coalition of rights activists has faulted the verdict delivered by Justice James Omotosho of the Abuja Federal High Court in the trial of the leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra, Nnamdi Kanu.
Justice Omotosho had on Thursday convicted Kanu on terrorism charges brought against him by the Nigerian government and subsequently sentenced him to life imprisonment.
However, a coalition of rights activists, comprising the American Veterans of Igbo Descent, Ambassadors for Self Determination, and the Rising Sun Foundation, in a joint statement on Thursday evening pointed out what they described as a major flaw in the judgment.
While delivering the judgment, Justice Omotosho described Kanu as an international terrorist, stating that he ordered attacks on the United States and United Kingdom embassies in Nigeria.
Reacting to the judgment, the activists coalition said the allegation that Kanu ordered attacks on the US and UK embassies was never raised in the charges filed against him, and was also not brought up throughout the proceedings of the trial.
Wondering how the judge arrived at the allegation, the activists described the claim as a manufactured lie that collapsed the judgment against Kanu.
Parts of the statement titled ‘Justice Omotosho’s fictional “bomb plot” against US and UK missions’ read, “We address you today on one central, shocking point in the judgment delivered by Justice James Omotosho against Mazi Nnamdi Kanu — the claim that Mazi Nnamdi Kanu planned to bomb the British and United States missions in Nigeria.
“We state openly and without fear of contradiction: This allegation was never charged, never testified to, never tendered in evidence, and never mentioned by any witness in the entire trial. It is a pure invention of the judge, inserted into the judgment to demonise Mazi Nnamdi Kanu before the world and to drive a wedge between him and the governments of the United States and the United Kingdom.”
Stressing that “no witness ever spoke of any bombing plot,” the statement added, “Throughout the proceedings before Justice Omotosho: No charge alleged any plan to bomb US or UK embassies. No prosecution witness testified about any such plot. No document, exhibit, audio, video, or intelligence report was tendered to support such a claim. The defence had no opportunity to cross-examine any witness on this issue, because it never arose in court. Yet, in his judgment, Justice Omotosho casually wrote in this wild story of a supposed plan to bomb the British and American missions. This is not a mistake. It is a fabrication.
“In any criminal justice system worthy of the name, a judge cannot convict an accused person on the basis of stories invented in chambers and not proven in court.”
The activists insisted that the official transcripts of the trial will prove the ‘fabrication.’
The activists added that, to remove any doubt, they have resolved to release to the world the full certified transcripts of everything that transpired in Justice Omotosho’s court.
“Those transcripts will show clearly that no prosecutor, no witness, and no document ever mentioned any threat to US or UK missions. The only people who testified against Mazi Nnamdi Kanu were hired storytellers, and even they did not tell this particular story. The so-called ‘bomb plot’ exists only in the judgment, not in the evidence,” the statement added.
The activists called on the media, members of the diplomatic community, and human rights organisations to read the record themselves “and see how far a Federal High Court judge was prepared to go to justify a conviction without evidence.”
Further faulting the judge’s assertion, the activists noted that the alleged directive to attack the US and UK embassies makes no sense considering Kanu’s pro-US and UK record.
The statement said, “This invented ‘bomb plot’ is not only unsupported, it is absurd on its face. In 2017, Mazi Nnamdi Kanu organised the first and only Trump Solidarity Rally in Igweocha (Port Harcourt), where thousands peacefully marched in open support of the then-US President. In 2020, he personally attended a Trump campaign rally in Des Moines, Iowa, openly identifying with the American democratic process. These are not the actions of a man plotting to bomb US or UK missions. They are the actions of a man who, rightly or wrongly, sees the United States and the West as allies in the struggle for justice and self-determination.
“For a Nigerian judge to twist this history into a phantom ‘terror plot’ is not only dishonest; it is dangerous. It sends a message to the world that Nigerian courts are willing to weaponise lies against political defendants.”
The statement declared that the judge’s “fabrication” has destroyed the entire judgment.
“Under the Nigerian Constitution and basic common sense, a person can only be convicted on evidence given in court. The offence must be clearly written in a valid law, and the accused must have a fair chance to challenge any allegation. By importing a serious accusation that was never charged, was never proved, and was never put to the accused, Justice Omotosho violated Mazi Nnamdi Kanu’s right to fair hearing; turned himself from an impartial judge into a prosecution witness and propagandist; built his judgment on facts that do not exist in the record.
“Once a judge bases a criminal conviction on fabricated, extraneous material, the entire judgment is poisoned. It is legally unsafe, morally bankrupt, and constitutionally void. This single act of fabrication is enough, on its own, to nullify the judgment, justify its reversal on appeal, and trigger serious disciplinary action by the National Judicial Council (NJC),” the statement added.
Stating what the alleged fabrication means for the judiciary, the activists noted that when a judge in a criminal trial descends into the arena of fabrication and lies, the judiciary itself is in trouble.
“This is no longer about one man, Mazi Nnamdi Kanu. It is about whether any Nigerian can trust that our courts will decide cases on evidence, not on scripts; judges will respect the record, not rewrite it, and the bench will not be used as a tool to destroy political opponents.
“Justice Omotosho’s conduct sends the worst possible signal, both domestically and internationally. It tells the world that Nigeria’s courts can be used to manufacture ‘terrorists’ on paper while ignoring the actual evidence.”
Vowing that they will not allow the matter to pass quietly, the American Veterans of Igbo Descent, Ambassadors for Self Determination, and the Rising Sun Foundation outlined their next steps.
The next steps include “immediate publication of the full transcripts of proceedings before Justice Omotosho, for Nigerians and the international community to read before they falsify it,” and filing of appropriate appeals challenging the judgment on the ground that it is based on fabricated facts not supported by evidence.
They also plan to petition the National Judicial Council and relevant bodies, “asking them to investigate how such a grave falsehood found its way into a Federal High Court judgment,” and direct engagement with US and UK authorities, providing them with the record of proceedings to show that this alleged ‘bomb plot’ exists only in Justice Omotosho’s imagination.
The activists stressed that “the attempt to paint Mazi Nnamdi Kanu as a man who planned to bomb US and UK missions is a fallacy from the pit of propaganda, not from a court of law.”
“It is a stain on the judgment. It is a stain on the court. And unless it is decisively rejected, it will remain a stain on the Nigerian judiciary. We are determined to expose this fabrication in a way Justice Omotosho never imagined possible, with documents, with transcripts, and with the cold, hard truth,” the statement added.
DailyPost
By Eric Elezuo
The Federal High Court in Abuja has sentenced the leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) to life imprisonment, having been found guilty and convicted of all the seven count charges of terrorism brought against him by the Federal Government.
Delivering his judgment, the presiding judge, Justice James Omotosho, said the offences for which Kanu was found guilty carry a death sentence, but out of magnanimity, and in carrying out the example of Jesus Christ in showing mercy, he has decided to commute it to life imprisonment.
The Federal High Court in Abuja on Thursday has convicted the leader of the proscribed Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Nnamdi Kanu, for issuing “sit-at-home” orders that led to the closure of banks, schools, and economic activities across the Southeast, particularly on Mondays.
The court described the actions as “terrorist acts against Nigeria.”
Justice James Omotosho delivered the conviction while reading his judgment in Kanu’s ongoing trial on alleged treasonable felony and terrorism charges brought by the Federal Government.
Recall that Justice Omotosho had earlier dismissed Kanu’s no-case submission, ruling that prima facie (at first sight) evidence had been sufficiently provided by the Department of State Services (DSS), requiring “some explanation” from Kanu. However, Kanu refused to enter a defence and was eventually foreclosed after multiple adjournments.
The Federal Government accused Kanu of issuing threats via broadcasts across Nigeria, warning that anyone who flouted the sit-at-home order in the Southeast would face consequences, allegedly inciting insurrection against the state.
The prosecution further claimed that, due to Kanu’s directives, banks, schools, markets, shopping malls, and petrol stations in the Southeast remained mostly closed on Mondays. Kanu denied the allegations in the original 2015 case, paving the way for trial; however, the case commenced afresh before Justice Omotosho in 2025.
What the Court Said
Justice Omotosho held that since Kanu’s defence had been foreclosed, the court would rely solely on the prosecution’s evidence and several affidavits placed before the court.
The judge stated that anyone involved in acts of terrorism is liable, upon conviction, to life imprisonment.
He described terrorism as actions or threats of violence that create fear, especially when innocent people are targeted.
He noted that, in several broadcasts—including an interview with Sahara TV—Kanu threatened harm against the Federal Government and Nigerians, including members of his “own people.”
The judge quoted Kanu describing Nigeria as a “zoo” and referring to the Southeast as “Biafra.” He added that Kanu was fully aware of his actions, which could be inferred from his conduct.
For Count 2, relating to the sit-at-home directive that shut down banks and schools, the judge cited prosecution evidence showing that Kanu, on May 30, 2021, threatened to shut down the Southeast, including economic and educational sectors.
The court held that every Nigerian citizen is entitled to personal liberty and freedom of movement, noting that the people of the Southeast cannot be compelled to sit at home by Kanu, who holds no constitutional authority.
“The defendant, Kanu, is not the President of Nigeria and therefore lacked the power to impose sit-at-home orders on any part of the country. The act is not only unconstitutional but amounts to terrorist activity,” the judge ruled, convicting him on Count 2.
On Count 3, which relates to Kanu’s leadership of IPOB, the judge convicted him for leading a proscribed organization.
On Counts 4 and 5, which involve incitement of people to commit acts of terrorism against the state—offences liable to a death sentence—the judge agreed with the prosecution that Kanu encouraged attacks on security agents, institutions, and government property, citing instances where he allegedly called for the burning of Murtala Muhammed Airport and other facilities.
The court condemned Kanu’s behaviour, describing it as “evil”, highlighting that such an individual does not deserve to live within society.
He also convicted Kanu for inciting anarchy against Nigeria.
Source: Nairametrics
The court also found Kanu guilty and convicted him on Count 6.
