Sunday, December 11, 2016
The defense counsel to the detained leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra, IPOB, Barrister Ifeanyi Ejiofor in an interview with Chukwuemeka Chimerue of Biafra Writers, has revealed that the Federal government plans to manipulate the court ruling on whether or not to allow masked witnesses in the ongoing trial of Mazi Nnamdi Kanu and three others by bringing in the second defendant who was arrested months after the other defendants in the lawsuit lodged against them at a Federal High Court sitting in Abuja.
He also stated that the Prosecution hopes to use statements made under duress by the second defendant, Mr. Chidiebere Onwudiwe to further press charges against other defendants joined in the suit, adding that the Federal government would have long presented their witnesses in court if truly they have any and not relying on a mere unestablished allegation that their lives are being threatened.
Read also:BREAKING: "NNAMDI KANU'S OFFENCES ARE GRIEVOUS, I WILL NOT GRANT HIM BAIL"---Justice Binta Nyako
“I can assure you that the FG has no witnesses against Nnamdi Kanu because if they have any witness, the person would have long come to court to give evidence.
“Now we have told the court that the sections of the law which they(FG) are relying on cannot aver them in the circumstance, because principally, they smuggled in the second defendant who was arrested 5 months ago and charged him singularly on offence of terrorism.
“Why he was charged under that law, is to enable them to allow their witnesses to be shielded. We understand that fact but when you look at the poor evidence they filed in court against him, it’s only the extra-vicious statement he made to the DSS under duress and intimidation that they’re relying upon to file charges against him,” Ejiofor said.
Read also:Biafra: FG Has No Witnesses Against Nnamdi Kanu, We Have Other Options To Ensure He is Released Soon— Barr. Ejiofor
Quoting Section 341 of the Terrorism Act, the defense counsel said it is very clear that the Prosecution must satisfy the court with substantial particulars of the threats issued against the witnesses they intend to present to the court and not only by making a mere averment in their affidavit that their witnesses are being threatened.
“You must go further to prove to the court that these people whom you’re bringing are being threatened and that can be established by making them to disclose an affidavit, showing the particulars of who threatened them, the number that called them and why they’re threatened,” he further explained.
Ejiofor also stated that it is impossible for the witnesses to testify against his client for the fact that the locations of which the Prosecutor said they will be coming from is not even within the residential location of the accused.
Read also:Biafra: “Nigeria is Labouring Under Curse, Release Nnamdi Kanu And Stop Deceiving Nigerians”— Prophet Nwoko Lambasts Buhari, Obasanjo And S-West Religious Leaders
“These are people they are asking the court to give pseudo names, the names that does not represent what they answer. We have no problem with that but let them come to court, what we’re saying is that we want to see them personally to come and give evidence against our client and until that is done, we proceed.”
Ejiofor concluded by saying that the matter of whether or not to allow masked witnesses was hitherto entertained in another court and that it was on account of the Federal government’s failure to present their witnesses to testify in the case that resulted in their going to another court.
By Chukwuemeka Chimerue
Published By Nwosu C.S
For Biafra Writers
No comments
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.