The court says no to Nnamdi Kanu’s request for bail

     The court says no to Nnamdi Kanu’s request for bail.The bail application that was submitted by Nnamdi Kanu, the leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra, was denied by the Federal High Court in Abuja on Wednesday (IPOB).

The judge, Binta Nyako, stated in her decision about the bail application that the issue of Mr. Kanu’s absence from court since 2017 must first be determined before his bail request can be heard. This was stated in the judge’s ruling.


Npower News Tuesday May 17th

The judge stated that the defendant’s request for bail at this moment is premature because he has already violated all of the bail restrictions that were first given to him.

Mrs. Nyako advised both the attorney representing the prosecution and the attorney representing the defense that a trial should be held.




Hold Your Phone Tight: Man Advises US Rapper DaBaby

After concluding that Mr. Kanu had violated the terms of his bail, the court issued an arrest warrant for him in March of 2019.

The order to arrest the leader of IPOB was issued several months after he had fled the nation following the invasion of his residence by soldiers in Afara-Ukwu, which is located close to Umuahia in Abia State, in September 2017.

Due to Mr. Kanu’s disappearance, his trial, which he was going through in conjunction with his other defendants, was put on hold. As a result of this development, on March 28, 2018, the judge separated his trial from the trials of the other co-defendants in order to prevent any further delay in the proceedings against the other defendants.

The court says no to Nnamdi Kanu’s request for bail




After fleeing Nigeria, it is thought that Mr. Kanu, who was a citizen of both Britain and Nigeria, first settled in Israel and then made his way to the United Kingdom.

However, in June of 2021, it was stated by Abubakar Malami, who then the Attorney General of the Federation, that Mr. Kanu had been “intercepted” and brought back to Nigeria.

While Mr. Malami has remained silent regarding the location of Mr. Kanu’s arrest as well as the circumstances surrounding his return to Nigeria, members of the IPOB leader’s family as well as his attorneys have stated that he was kidnapped and “extraordinary renditioned” from Kenya.


Charges brought against Nnamdi Kanu by the FG have been amended, and attorneys have been indicted


The allegations leveled against Nnamdi Kanu, the leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra who is now being held in custody, have been updated by the Federal Government.

When this information was made public, a lawyer for the leader of IPOB also stated that the Federal Government had identified certain lawyers who were defending Nnamdi Kanu as accomplices of the defendant.

Ifeanyi Ejiofor and Maxwell Opara are two of the attorneys that are rumored to have been indicted by the Federal Government.

After Nnamdi Kanu was supposed to have skipped bail and departed the country, a member of the legal team for IPOB stated that the government claimed that the indicted lawyers were in frequent contact with Nnamdi Kanu.


It is anticipated that Nnamdi Kanu would be re-arraigned on the new accusations while he is currently present at the Federal High Court in Abuja.

On April 8, the court had exonerated the Federal Government of any wrongdoing regarding the accusation that the leader of the IPOB was kidnapped against his will and taken abroad to stand justice for his crimes.

In a decision, Nyako ruled that the practice of transferring suspects to another jurisdiction in order to facilitate criminal investigations is permissible.


Nyako stated that because Kanu was wanted on a bench warrant, the law permitted that he may be detained and transported to face his trial whenever he was observed. This authorized law enforcement to bring Kanu to face his trial.

It is permissible to carry out a rendition for the purposes of a criminal inquiry.

“In the present instance, the court has issued a warrant for the defendant’s arrest” (Kanu). It should suffice to indicate that he is wanted by the court at this time,” she said.

After the judge ruled against Kanu’s attempt to dispute the terrorism accusation, the judge upheld seven of the counts in the new charge that the federal government had filed against the head of the IPOB.


Nyako stated that the federal government, acting through the Office of the Attorney General of the Federation, had been successful in establishing some claims against Kanu in counts one, two, three, four, five, eight, and fifteen.

“The first, second, third, fourth, fifth, eighth, and fifteenth counts all show allegations. She ruled that the court should move through with prosecuting Kanu on those counts and proceed with the trial.

Following the examination of all 15 counts, she came to the conclusion that around eight of the counts seemed to be the same and did not disclose any action.


As a result, she gave the order to strike out counts six, seven, nine, ten, eleven, twelve, thirteen, and fourteen.

Nyako also came to the conclusion that the order that labeled IPOB as a terrorist organization would remain in effect until it was overturned on appeal because the case was still being heard.

She did not buy the defense attorney for Kanu, Chief Mike Ozekhome, SAN’s argument that an appeal might still be filed on the question of whether or not the Nigerian government considers IPOB to be a terrorist organization.

At the time when this report was being written, the hearing regarding the case was still in progress.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

%d bloggers like this: