Connect with us


‘Nnamdi Kanu didn’t jump bail, will prove how FG made him flee Nigeria’ – Lawyer, Ejimakor




Aloy Ejimakor, lawyer to Nnamdi Kanu, chief of the Indigenous Folks of Biafra, IPOB, has disclosed that the agitator is able to show to the world that he didn’t leap bail in 2017.

Talking solely with DAILY POST, the lawyer stated the IPOB chief will show that the Nigerian authorities made him flee Nigeria.

Ejimakor stated the army invasion of Kanu’s residence and menace to his life made him unable to attend his trials and flee Nigeria.

Nnamdi Kanu: IPOB lastly reveals nation the place secessionist chief was arrested

Kanu was arrested and arraigned in courtroom for fees bordering on treason in 2017.

Justice Binta Nyako of an Abuja Federal Excessive Courtroom had granted him bail in 2017.

Kanu, nevertheless, didn’t proceed his trial after a army invasion of his house in Afaraukwu, Abia State.

After the army invasion, the IPOB chief fled the nation to Europe, the place he operated and coordinated his agitation for Biafra from.

Few weeks in the past, he was captured by the Nigerian authorities in an African nation believed to be Kenya and repatriated to Nigeria to proceed his trial earlier than Justice Nyako.

Upon his return, Justice Nyako had ordered that he needs to be remanded within the custody of the Division of State Companies, DSS.

Amid this, there have been wild speculations that Kanu jumped bail in 2017.

Nonetheless, Ejimakor dismissed the claims of leaping bail, stressing that the menace to Kanu’s life made him flee the nation.

Ejimakor stated: “Regardless of what he has handed by way of, Nnamdi Kanu was in excessive spirits once I met with him yesterday, July 17; and he’s trying ahead to the primary alternative to debunk this entire story of him leaping bail. Thus far, he has by no means had such a chance at the same time as he had beforehand requested it within the correct discussion board.

“In my thought-about view, Kanu by no means jumped bail, one thing made him to flee Nigeria and never attend his trial in October in 2017.

Biafra: Nnamdi Kanu’s lawyer provides replace on IPOB chief’s situation in DSS custody

“That one thing was the army invasion of his homestead, which was subsequently delivered to the eye of the courtroom in an software that was by no means heard to today.

“So, maybe, this entire unlucky incident would offer the primary alternative to ventilate this nagging query of leaping bail, as it should simply be proven that Kanu by no means made a voluntary resolution to not attend his trial. Leaping bail takes some form of voluntary act on the a part of the defendant.

“Kanu’s case is only a case of involuntary act or omission introduced by the actions of the Nigerian authorities that had him on trial and thus held an abiding authorized curiosity for him to stay in Nigeria to take his trial. In fact, it’s the identical Nigerian authorities that claims Kanu jumped bail and thus seeks to learn from it that destroyed Kanu’s capability or obligation to look at his trial.

“On the preponderance of the proof, it might be unreasonable for anyone to conclude that Kanu jumped bail. It’s not a case of leaping bail simpliciter. Reasonably, it’s a clear case of an hostile celebration forcing Kanu to flee, solely to show round and accuse him of leaping bail.

“If you happen to recover from the difficulty of Kanu leaping bail, then the bench warrant upon which his rendition from Kenya was grounded would, in hindsight, be seen to be unsuitable. It’s a causal chain. Kanu was free on bond, the federal government invaded his house and to his credit score, he efficiently fled from the hazard. However as a substitute of giving him a listening to on why he fled, you declare him a fugitive and finally rendition him on account of that. That’s not acceptable. The federal government can not revenue from its personal unsuitable.

“The rendition can’t stand as a result of this whole factor was brought on by the invasion and never by Kanu. However even when he jumped bail, extradition, not extraordinary rendition is the one authorized pathway to forcing him again to Nigeria. However I can inform you that within the distinctive circumstances of Kanu, any extradition proceedings, both in Britain or Kenya, would have been summarily denied. That’s most likely why Nigeria by no means bothered to use for it. Higher but, extraordinary rendition could also be a Pyrrhic victory however in the long term, it creates a helluva of authorized, political and diplomatic issues for any individuals or entities complicit in it.”

Share this Story
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

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