Court Orders Senator Abaribe to Produce Kanu in Court

Justice Binta Nyako of the Federal High Court in Abuja on Tuesday ordered a  Senator Enyinaya Abaribe and two others to appear in court and explained why leader of the proscribed Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Nnamdi Kanu was absent in court to face his trial.

Abaribe, Immanuel Okabemadu and Tochukwu Uchendu had guarantee that Kanu would attend his trial following the bail he was granted by the Court to attend to his failing health. In addition they signed a bail bond of N100million each that would be forfeited in the event that the defendant failed to appear in court to face trial. 

However, when the matter was called up, the three other defendants were in court except Nnamdi Kanu.

Following the absence of the first defendant the Prosecution counsel Shuaibu Labaran urged the court to revoke the bail granted the first defendant. He argued that failure to attend to the day to day trial is a serious violation of the law. 

He told the court that the matter was adjourned for 

hearing but given the circumstances of the absence of the first defendant the trial may not hold in the interest of justice. 

"Failure to appear in court,  we urge this court to revoke the bail granted the first defendant and issue bench warrant for arrest of the first defendant and order the three sureties Senator Enyinaya  Abaribe,  Emmanuel shalum Okabemmadu, Tochukwu Uchendu to show cause why the bail bond of N100million each should not be forfeited or commit three of them to prison", he urged the court.

Following his submission, the trial Judge then called on counsel to the first defendant, Ifeanyi EJiofor to explain why his client was not in court.

Responding Ejiofor said his client was willing to stand trial but he cannot tell his whereabouts since the invasion of the first defendant home on 14th September 2017 by soldiers of the Nigerian Army.

«I cannot tell the court at this stage whether the defendant is alive or dead", he said.

"I don't know where he is, the soldiers should tell the court the whereabouts of the first defendant", he added.

Justice Nyako then called on the sureties to explain why Kanu was not in court to face his trial.

Though non of the sureties was in court but counsel to Abaribe; Ogechi Ogbonna told the court Abaribe does not  know Kanu's whereabouts adding that Abaribe had already filed a motion of withdrawal as Kanu's surety.

However justice Nyako held that it would be impossible for Abaribe to withdraw as surety to Kanu without first producing him in court. "Before he can wash off his hands the defendant has to be here", she said.

 

The judge added that other alternative to Abaribe include, "I don't know where he is please take my bail bond or 3, give me time to produce him".

Though Abaribe's counsel had continued to insist nobody including his client know the whereabout of Kanu,  he however opted for the third option given by the Court, adding that more effort would be made at locating the first defendant.

In a brief ruling, Justice Nyako said, "Sureties should come to court to show cause why the first defendant was not in court". The court noted that it is the responsibility of the surety to make sure the defendant does not breach his bail condition.

The court also noted that it cannot take a decision on Abaribe's motion seeking withdrawal as witness unless the defendant was produced in Court.