Abuja, Nigeria — The ongoing court battle involving Nnamdi Kanu, leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), witnessed dramatic revelations on Friday as a government witness admitted that Kanu’s initial statement was taken without legal representation. The prosecution’s integrity faced serious scrutiny during the cross-examination by Chief Kanu Agabi (SAN), Kanu’s lead counsel.
At the Federal High Court in Abuja, the Department of State Services (DSS) operative known as PW1, confirmed that Kanu was arrested without any weapons or incriminating items on him. This was revealed amid growing concerns about the legal procedures surrounding the case against Kanu, who has been in DSS custody since his controversial extradition from Kenya in 2021.
During the witness’s testimony, Agabi pressed: “Did you take my client’s statement with or without his lawyer?” The witness responded, “His statement was taken without his lawyer,” highlighting an apparent breach of judicial protocol.
The court session focused on the collection of evidence, specifically a video depicting Kanu’s interrogation. The witness admitted to being among those present during the interrogation but confirmed he did not appear in the video. He stated, “To arrest Nnamdi Kanu, bring him to Abuja and interview him.” In light of this, Agabi questioned the witness’s ability to provide reliable evidence.
When asked about items seized from Kanu during the arrest, the witness acknowledged that they were presented in court but claimed, “My task wasn’t to analyse the items.” Notably, Kanu’s phone was excluded from evidence for being deemed “immaterial.”
Agabi continued to challenge the witness’s credibility, asking about the age of the seized items. “Do you agree most of the items have lost their use since it’s over 10 years?” the counsel queried. The witness confessed, “Yes.”
Furthermore, the witness conceded that no incriminating evidence had been found on another individual who was arrested alongside Kanu. Agabi inquired whether any weapons had been discovered, to which the witness plainly answered, “None.” He also confirmed that Kanu had not named any accomplices during his statement and that only one statement was recorded in Lagos.
While discussing the broader implications of Kanu’s trial, Agabi underscored the uniqueness of Kanu’s situation, stating, “I put it to you that in the entire nation, this defendant is the only person standing trial for the agitation of Biafra.” The witness, lacking detailed knowledge on the matter, replied, “I do not have information about that. All I know is I did the arrest in Lagos.”
In a surprising twist, the witness mentioned Simon Ekpa, whom he claimed to know through social media discussions but could not confirm if Ekpa was facing charges alongside Kanu. Agabi rebutted, pressing the witness further on his reliance on social media, asking, “So because of what you read from social media, you want my defendant to be sentenced to death?”
Agabi wrapped up the intense cross-examination with a sharp note: “We are keeping counts of your ‘I don’t knows’, Mr. Witness.”
The proceeding, which served as a crucial moment in Kanu’s long-standing legal battle, is set to resume as both sides continue to present their arguments in hopes of reaching a conclusion.
