Justice Nyako fixed the date after counsel for Kanu, Mike Ozekhome as well as prosecution counsel, Shuaibu Labaran, had adopted arguments for and against the defendant’s preliminary objection.

In a short adumbration, Ozekhome pleaded with the court to acquit and dismiss all the charges filed against Kanu by the Federal Government.

At a resumed trial on Wednesday, Ozekhome argued that the 15-count amended charge was “defective and baseless”.

Specifically, he informed the court that his application seeks the “quashing, striking out and dismissing of the 15-count amended charge” against Kanu for being “incompetent and denying the court of jurisdiction” to entertain charge.

The application, with 34 grounds, and supported by 36-paragraph affidavit, Ozekhome said, also seeks for an order acquitting and discharging Kanu for want of jurisdiction and defective, baseless and incompetent charges. Ozekhome adopted his application and asked court to quash, strike out and dismiss the entire charges.

He asked the court to look at the entire grounds and affidavit, from paragraph 5 to 36, of notice of preliminary objection, etc

The fresh charges border on treasonable felony and terrorism following the pending charges he was facing since 2016 and it was also learnt that the court has issued a hearing notice in the case which is billed to commence on Thursday, October 21.

Justice Binta Nyako made fresh directives on the conduct of the proceedings throughout the case in the notice.

It read “This case will be transferred from the General Cause List to the hearing paper for Thursday 21st October 2021at 9 o’clock forenoon and will come on to be on that day if the business of the court permits or otherwise on some adjustment day of which you will receive no further notice. If either party desires to postpone the hearing, he must apply to the court as soon as possible for that purpose and if the application is based on any matter of fact, he must be prepared to give proof of those facts. The parties are warned that at the hearing, they are required to bring forward all the evidence by witnesses or by documents which each of them desires to rely on in support of his own case and in contradiction of that of his opponent. The proof will be required at the hearing and not on a subsequent day, and parties failing to bring their evidence forward at the proper time may find themselves absolutely precluded from adducing it at all, or at best only allowed to do so on payment of substantial costs to the other side, and on such other terms as the court deems fits to impose. Parties desirous to enforce the attendance of witnesses should apply at once to the court to issue one or more summonses for the attendance of the witnesses required. It is indispensable that the application should be made so as to allow time for reasonable notice to the witnesses required. If the witness is required to bring books or papers, they must be particularized in the summons sufficiently to enable him to understand what is meant. Any party summoning a witness through the court thereby becomes liable to pay such witness a reasonable sum of money to be fixed by the court for his expense and loss of time. The court may refuse to enforce the attendance of a witness unless such sum has been fixed and deposited in the court. If either party desires to use in evidence at the hearing, any book or document in the possession or power of the other party, he must give the other party, reasonable notice in writing to produce It at the hearing, failing which he will not be allowed to give any secondary evidence of its contents.”

Explaining how Nnamdi Kanu incited violence in some parts of the country, the prosecution averred that it will lead evidence that Kanu granted an interview with Sahara Reporters “wherein he asserted that Nigeria, which he refers to as the ‘zoo’, ‘has come to an end.’”

The IPOB leader was accused of saying that violence is the language people in the ‘zoo’ understand, adding that “if they fail to give us Biafra, Somalia will be a child’s play; Somalia will look like paradise. We will kill everybody in that zoo called Nigeria. If they fail to give us Biafra, there will be no more living in the zoo.”

The prosecution which alleged that Kanu does not believe in a peaceful approach to the realisation of Biafra and has insisted that he is not aware of anywhere peaceful approach worked added that the IPOB leader in a broadcast on August 1, 2015, directed his members in Diaspora to identify families of Nigerian dignitaries abroad, their residences and schools for reprisal when security agencies attack Biafrans.

The prosecution said, “In his broadcasts, he invited his listeners to burn down as many police stations as police and kill any policeman and military personnel.”

He was also accused of seeking to carve out the Republic of Biafra from South East, South-South, parts of Kogi and Benue states against the provision of Section 41(c)of the Criminal Code Act, 2004.

In a broadcast on Radio Biafra, London, monitored in Enugu on 28th April 2015, Kanu is alleged to have referred to President Muhammadu Buhari, who is the Commander-in-Chief of the Federal Republic of Nigeria as a paedophile, terrorist and an embodiment of evil “knowing same to be false”, which contravenes Section 357 of the Criminal Code Act, 2004.

Other charges include;

“That you Nnamdi Kanu, male adult of Afarachukw lbeku Umahia North Local Government Area of Abia State between the month of March and April 2015 imported into Nigeria and kept in Ubulusiizor in Ihiala Local Government Area of Anambra state within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court, a Radio transmitter known as TRAM 50l concealed in a container of used household Which you declared as used household items and you thereby committed an offence contrary to Section 47 (2) of the Criminal Code of Act, Cap C45, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 2004.

“On the 16th of May, 2021 in the London United Kingdom within the jurisdiction of this honourable court did commit and act in furtherance of an act of terrorism by making a broadcast that “in two weeks time, what will happen will shake the world, people will die, the whole world will stand still mark my word” and you thereby committed an offence contrary to and punishable under Section 1 (2) (h) of the Terrorism Prevention Amendment Act, 2013.”

Kanu told the presiding judge, Justice Binta Nyako, through his counsel, Ifeanyi Ejiofor, that the application to restore the IPOB leader’s bail so that he could face his trial was filed on April 1.

He said “We have an application for bail filed on April 1, 2019, the application was served on the prosecution and it is ripped for hearing. We urge the court to restore his bail on the ground that the court will guarantee his safety when he comes back to the country to continue his trial”.

Delivering the ruling, Justice Nyako, who adjourned the matter till January 16, said the only way he could guarantee Kanu’s safety was to keep him in prison. She said even judges are no longer safe in the country.