The Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) has criticized a ruling by Justice James Omotosho of the Federal High Court, Abuja, suggesting that its detained leader, Nnamdi Kanu, “will need to explain certain things” in his ongoing terrorism case.
In a statement issued by IPOB spokesperson Emma Powerful on Saturday, the group argued that the judge’s comment violates Section 36(11) of the 1999 Constitution, which protects defendants from being compelled to testify against themselves. IPOB also insisted that the burden of proof rests entirely on the prosecution.
“We ask Justice Omotosho directly: explain certain things like what?” the statement read. “Does the judge not know that Section 36(11) of the Nigerian Constitution forbids compelling any defendant to testify against himself? Does the judge not understand that the burden of proof rests solely on the prosecution, not on the accused?”
IPOB alleged that the Abuja courts are “satisfying the whims and caprices of the federal government,” claiming political interference in Kanu’s case. “By demanding that our leader ‘explain certain things,’ Justice Omotosho is not applying the law; he is aiding persecution,” the group said, adding that the prosecution’s case is “built on contradictory witnesses, absence of investigation reports, and reliance on a repealed law.”
Kanu, who faces terrorism-related charges, has been in custody amid a protracted legal battle that has drawn domestic and international attention. IPOB maintains that Kanu’s only “crime” is advocating self-determination for the Igbo people and reiterated its call for the courts to “stop this charade of shifting the burden of proof.”
The group said it “stands on the side of truth and international law,” urging the judiciary to uphold due process and constitutional guarantees during the trial.
Neither the Federal High Court nor the Federal Ministry of Justice had issued a response to IPOB’s latest claims at press time.
