IPOB explains reason for Kanu’s outburst during his recent court trial

From Stanley Uzoaru, Owerri

The Indigenous People of Biafra  (IPOB) has given reasons for its leader’s angry outburst during his last court sitting in Abuja.

Spokesman of the group, Emma Powerful, alleged that the judiciary by his continual trial of its leader, Nnamdi Kanu, has derailed.

His statement read in part: “It is scandalous that up until now, seven days after such show of shame, leading lights within the legal profession have not called for a public independent inquiry into the circumstances surrounding such blatant and shameless attempt to subvert the course of justice in full view of the world.

“For the avoidance of doubt, we wish to place it on record that it was the Supreme Court of Nigeria, the highest court in the land, in a judgement that determined that the impartiality of Justice Binta Nyako is suspect.

“This formed the basis of her recusal which she did not contest. She entered an order of court, which is law, that she would no longer preside over the case of our leader Onyendu Mazi Nnamdi Kanu. Why Chief Judge John Tsoho decided on his own to ignore a ruling made by the highest court (Supreme Court), a subsisting court order recusing Justice Binta Nyako and a key section of the law that governs the conduct of judges, is a question only John Tsoho can answer.

“That a judge can sit without jurisdiction and purport to adjourn a case indefinitely, which by law she is not allowed to do, is indicative that rule of law has been jettisoned for rule of impunity.

“One would have expected the Chairman of the Body of Benchers to point out the blatant illegality of the reassigning of a case file to a judge who stand recused by virtue of a court order or intervene and call both the Chief Justice and the Binta Nyako to order. He failed to do any of the above but instead actively participated in the rape of justice for reasons best known to him.

“Thing is certain, this impunity will not stand because common law which is what Nigeria practices are predicated on common sense and it is a notorious fact that no judge can sit in judgement over his own case.

“Therefore, asking Binta Nyako to review her own order of recusal without following due process of law is dead on arrival. Binta Nyako’s order of recusal in conjunction with Supreme Court decision on the issue of her bias against Mazi Nnamdi Kanu and the key provision of the National Judicial Policy especially Section 1 (c) is enough to deny Binta Nyako jurisdiction to preside over this matter,” Powerful stated.