The Chief Judge of the Federal High Court, Justice John Tsoho, has directed that the treason trial of Nnamdi Kanu, leader of the separatist group Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), be returned to Justice Binta Nyako for continued hearing.
This follows Justice Nyako’s recent recusal from the case on September 24, after Kanu demanded that she step down, citing concerns over the fairness of the proceedings.
Justice Tsoho’s decision came with a condition. He stated that Kanu must file a formal application, supported by an affidavit, explaining why he seeks a new judge for the trial.
In addition, the prosecution must be allowed to respond to Kanu’s request. Justice Nyako will then preside over a hearing to determine whether or not to withdraw from the case officially.
The directive appears to be in response to concerns over the handling of such judicial withdrawals.
It is believed that Justice Tsoho’s condition was set to avoid a repeat of the controversy that occurred in a money laundering case involving former Benue State Governor, Gabriel Suswam. In that instance, Justice Ahmed Mohammed withdrew from the case without formal proceedings, a decision later overturned by the Court of Appeal. The court ruled that the withdrawal was improper because the parties involved were not given an opportunity to address the matter.
Kanu’s legal battle has faced multiple setbacks with judges withdrawing from the case at his request. His first appearance before the Federal High Court occurred on December 23, 2015, when he, along with other defendants, was brought before Justice Mohammed. Kanu objected to being tried by Justice Mohammed, expressing concerns about receiving a fair trial. The judge subsequently stepped down, and the case was reassigned.
In September 2016, Kanu was brought before Justice Tsoho, who later withdrew following a petition by Kanu’s lawyers to the National Judicial Council (NJC). The petition alleged that Justice Tsoho had made conflicting rulings on a prosecution application to shield witnesses from public view. The defense argued that this decision undermined the fairness of the trial.
Following Justice Tsoho’s withdrawal, the case was assigned to Justice Nyako, who began presiding over the matter in 2016. However, her recent recusal marks the third time a judge has withdrawn from the high-profile case at Kanu’s request.
As the trial moves forward, all eyes are on whether Kanu will provide sufficient reasons in his formal application to justify another judicial reassignment or if Justice Nyako will continue to oversee the case.
The prosecution’s response and the outcome of the pending ruling will be pivotal in determining the next steps in Kanu’s long-running legal battle.