Abuja, February 11, 2025 – The courtroom at the Federal High Court, Abuja, was charged with tension as the embattled leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Nnamdi Kanu, openly challenged Justice Binta Nyako’s authority to preside over his case. The dramatic courtroom exchange, which took place today, saw Kanu adamantly asserting that Justice Nyako lacked the jurisdiction to continue with the matter following her prior recusal in September 2024.
“I Want to Speak” – Kanu Declares His Intent to Represent Himself
During the proceedings, Nnamdi Kanu suddenly requested to address the court, declaring:
“I want to speak.”
In response, Justice Nyako questioned whether he intended to take over from his legal counsel, to which Kanu replied:
“Yes, I want to take over.”
Kanu proceeded to argue that his presence in court was out of respect for the judiciary, but he maintained that the judge had no jurisdiction to continue hearing the case, citing her formal recusal months prior.
Kanu vs. the Prosecuting Counsel
As the session continued, Kanu confronted the prosecuting counsel, expressing his discontent with the legal process:
“A grown-up man like you who should be in the village making sure that things are done properly is here subverting the law.”
“I don’t recognise the authority of this court to preside over my case. Everything you said here is meaningless to me.”
In a strongly worded argument, Kanu questioned the selective application of the law in his case:
“Why is it that when it comes to my case, everything is turned upside-down?”
He further rejected the validity of a memo sent by the Chief Judge of the Federal High Court that returned the case file to Justice Nyako, arguing that it could not override the formal court order made in September 2024, which acknowledged her recusal.
Justice Nyako Responds, Kanu Fires Back
In response to Kanu’s challenge, Justice Nyako advised him to formally appeal the Chief Judge’s directive:
“You are at liberty to appeal the directive of the Chief Judge.”
However, Kanu stood his ground, dismissing her authority over his case:
“If the Chief Judge disagrees, he should appeal the decision. You cannot preside over this case—not now, not today, not ever. You stand recused and you must leave my case. I don’t need you in my case. You are biased. Tell the Chief Judge that Nnamdi Kanu said so.”
In a bold assertion, Kanu went further, condemning the court itself:
“This is not a court of law; this is a shrine to injustice, and I will not subject myself to it.”
Prosecuting Counsel Requests a Trial Date Amid Heated Exchanges
At this point, the prosecuting counsel, apparently seeking to move forward with the trial, urged Justice Nyako to set a definite date:
“In view of the fact that the defendant has indicated that he would not make a formal application, I apply that your lordship gives us a definite date for trial.”
However, Kanu, visibly angered, accused the prosecuting counsel of complicity in what he termed as a perversion of justice:
“Because of the money they are paying you from the AGF’s office, a grown-up man like you is here supporting evil. The rule of law says you should go on appeal.”
He also took direct aim at the Chief Judge, alleging judicial bias:
“The same Chief Judge writing this stupid memo—I have recused him before. He sat on appeal; I took him to the NJC and recused him. Why is he insisting on this one? He wants to embarrass your lordship by asking her to sit on this case.”
Justice Nyako Adjourns Case Indefinitely, Kanu Rejects Ruling
With the heated back-and-forth showing no sign of resolution, Justice Nyako announced an indefinite adjournment, stating:
“The only decision I can make right now is that in the light of what is happening now in court, I am going to adjourn this case sine die (indefinitely).”
However, in a swift response, Kanu rejected the ruling, asserting that the judge lacked the jurisdiction to adjourn the case:
“You have no jurisdiction to adjourn anything—none whatsoever. You cannot make an order without jurisdiction. The memo from the Chief Judge cannot confer jurisdiction upon you.”
Silence and Deep Reflection in the Courtroom
Following Kanu’s fierce rebuttal, the entire courtroom fell silent for five minutes, with those present appearing deep in thought, possibly reflecting on the validity of his legal argument and the overall state of judicial proceedings in Nigeria.
What Next for Nnamdi Kanu?
This latest courtroom drama further complicates Kanu’s long-standing legal battle, which has international attention and widespread support among his followers. With the trial now indefinitely adjourned, legal experts speculate that this case may be tied up in appeals and further judicial reviews for months, if not years.
Reactions from the Public and Legal Community
Following the proceedings, legal analysts and political commentators have weighed in on the events, with some supporting Kanu’s arguments about judicial fairness, while others believe he undermined the authority of the court.
As the legal impasse continues, many Nigerians are left asking: Will Nnamdi Kanu’s legal team escalate this matter to a higher court? Or will this adjournment keep him in legal limbo indefinitely?
What do you think? Share your thoughts below.
