The leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra, Nnamdi Kanu, has received a court order mandating him to appear for a hearing on Monday, February 10, 2025, before Justice Binta Nyako of the Federal High Court Abuja. This was contained in a hearing notice issued by the court. The notice, dated January 22, 2025, was addressed to Kanu’s lead counsel, Aloy Ejimakor.

It is recalled that Kanu had earlier requested that his case be transferred to the South-East if no judge at the Federal High Court in Abuja was willing to handle it apart from Justice Nyako.

On September 24, 2024, during one of the court sessions, Kanu requested in open court that Justice Nyako recuse herself from his trial, citing a lack of confidence in her handling of the case. Following this request, Justice Nyako recused herself and transferred the case file to Justice Tsoho. However, Justice Tsoho subsequently returned the case file to Justice Nyako for the continuation of the trial.

Kanu has since maintained that Justice Nyako presiding over the case after her recusal would amount to a violation of her own judicial orders. He instructed his legal team to ensure that she refrains from handling the case.

In response to the hearing notice, Ejimakor expressed surprise, stating that they “shall appear with bated breath.”

The hearing notice reads partly: “Suit No: FHC/ABJ/CR/383/2015 – Hearing notice between the Federal Republic of Nigeria (Plaintiff) and Nnamdi Kanu (Defendant). This case will be transferred from the general cause list to the hearing paper for Monday, the 10th day of February 2025, at 9:00 a.m. in the forenoon and will come on to be heard on that day if the business of the court permits, or otherwise on some adjournment day of which you will receive no further notice.

“If either party desires to postpone the hearing, they must apply to the Court as soon as possible for that purpose. If the application is based on any matter of fact, the applicant must be prepared to provide proof of those facts.

“The parties are warned that at the hearing, they are required to bring forward all the evidence by witnesses or documents they desire to rely on in support of their case or in contradiction of their opponent’s case. The proof will be required at the hearing and not on a subsequent day. Parties failing to bring their evidence forward at the proper time may find themselves precluded from adducing it, or, at best, allowed to do so on payment of substantial costs to the other side and under such terms as the Court deems fit.”

Meanwhile, Kanu, through his counsel Ejimakor, reiterated his desire to have the matter transferred to a High Court in the South- East in a letter dated January 30, 2025. The letter reads: “We are Solicitors-of-Record to the Defendant, Mazi Nnamdi Kanu (hereafter: our Client/Defendant), in the above-captioned matter. Pursuant to Order 49, Rule 3 of the Federal High Court Rules 2019 and Section 45 of the Federal High Court Act, we hereby humbly apply for the transfer of this matter from the Abuja division of the Federal High Court to any division of the Court in the Southeast. Our application is grounded on the following:

“On 24th September 2024, Honorable Justice Binta Murtala-Nyako entered an Order recusing herself from handling this case, pursuant to an oral application made by the Defendant in open court. The said Order is hereby attached and marked as Annexure 1.

“We are reliably informed that following the said recusal, Justice Murtala-Nyako promptly sent the case file to Your Lordship for the purpose of reassigning it to another Judge of the Abuja division of the Federal High Court. However, it came to pass that Your Lordship was unable to reassign the case because no Judge in the Abuja division agreed to take it. Consequently, the case file was sent back to Justice Nyako, from whose Court we have now received a hearing notice setting the matter down for hearing on 10th February 2025.”

Ejimakor in the letter argued that Justice Nyako no longer has jurisdiction to handle the case following her recusal, which he described as binding.

He further stated, “Given that no other Judge in the Abuja division is willing to take the case, the only viable option is to transfer the case to any division of the Federal High Court in the Southeast geopolitical zone, especially since the alleged offences have an impact in the Southeast (and not Abuja). This gives the Southeast divisions superior jurisdiction compared to Abuja.”

THE PUNCH reports that Ejimakor appealed to the Court to consider the request to prevent a miscarriage of justice for the Defendant.

To join our CITY LAWYER Channel on WhatsApp, click here

To join our Telegram platform, click here 

COPYRIGHT 2022 CITY LAWYER. Please send emails to citylawyermag@gmail.com. Join us on Facebook at https://web.facebook.com/City-Lawyer-Magazine-434937936684320 and on “X” (TWITTER) at https://twitter.com/CityLawyerMag. To ADVERTISE in CITY LAWYER or for Special Features, please email citylawyermag@gmail.com or call 08138380083.

All materials available on this Website are protected by copyright, trade mark and other proprietary and intellectual property laws. You may not use any of our intellectual property rights without our express written consent or attribution to www.citylawyermag.com. However, you are permitted to print or save to your individual PC, tablet or storage extracts from this Website for your own personal non-commercial use.