JUSTICE James Omotosho of the federal high court Abuja, has adjourned the trial of the leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Nnamdi Kanu on alleged terrorism, to October 16th.
News Point Nigeria reports that the trial was adjourned following the inability of the Nigerian Medical Association to present its report on the health status of Kanu to the court.
At the last adjourned date, Justice Omotosho ordered the President of the Nigerian Medical Association (NMA) to constitute a board of medical experts to investigate the alleged deteriorating health of the defendant and to determine whether the medical facility at the Department of State Services (DSS) headquarters is adequate for his care or if he should be moved to a private ward at the National Hospital.
The report is also to determine whether Kanu is fit to stand for the continuation of his trial.
At the day’s proceeding, Counsel to the FG, Suraj S’aad, informed the court that the medical board had contacted them that the report was not ready for presentation as directed by the court.
The senior lawyer, therefore, applied for a week adjournment to enable the NMA medical board conclude its investigation.
Following no objection to the adjournment request, Justice Omotosho fixed October 16th for the board to submit its report.
Kanu is being prosecuted by the DSS on a seven-count charge bordering of his alleged involvement in terrorism activities. On September 26, the court rejected the no-case submission of the IPOB leader.
In a ruling, Justice Omotosho held that the prosecution had established a case against Kanu to warrant that he be ordered to enter his defence.
The judge, who dismissed Kanu’s no-case submission, found that the evidence led by the prosecution and the exhibits it tendered, have raised serious allegations of Kanu’s involvement in terrorist activities to warrant that he be allowed to defend himself.
The court said the evidence and exhibits and the need for him to demonstrate and lead evidence on his allegations of an extraordinary rendition required that the defendant is given the opportunity and afforded his fundamental rights to fair hearing to be allowed to enter his defence.
