Nnamdi Kanu’s Trial: Lawyers Seek Solution as Judges Recuse Themselves
The prolonged trial of Nnamdi Kanu, leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), has raised concerns due to the withdrawal of three judges from his case since 2015. Kanu faces charges ranging from treasonable felony to terrorism.
Kanu’s lead counsel, Aloy Ejimakor, attributes the judges’ recusal to the judiciary’s struggle with delivering a verdict. Ejimakor cited the Court of Appeal’s acquittal of Kanu, later reversed by the Supreme Court, as evidence of judicial conflict.
Activist lawyer Madubuachi Idam suggests a fair trial would prevent judges from recusing themselves. Idam criticizes the government’s handling of the case, stating that unnecessary delays and amendments have prolonged the trial.
Ejimakor advocates for treating Kanu in accordance with the law and Constitution. He proposes restoring Kanu’s bail, as ruled by the Supreme Court, to ensure a fair trial.
Both Ejimakor and Idam believe a political solution is still possible. Idam suggests President Bola Tinubu may be considering consultations on a political solution, citing the president’s silence on the matter.
The continued prosecution of Kanu has sparked debate. Ejimakor notes that the case remains open to both political and judicial solutions. Idam advises Tinubu to consider a political solution, citing the need to address the underlying issues.
The trial has sparked concerns about the rule of law and fundamental fairness. As the case continues, attention remains focused on the judiciary’s handling of Kanu’s trial and potential solutions.
