By Ayomide Otitoju
Proceedings at the Federal High Court in Abuja grew tense on Thursday as the trial of Nnamdi Kanu, leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), resumed with a stern reprimand from the presiding judge directed at the Federal Government over repeated delays and lack of preparedness.
The judge, visibly frustrated by the prosecution’s slow pace, issued a pointed warning to the legal team led by Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Adegboyega Awomolo, insisting that the court would no longer entertain undue adjournments.
“You must pick six days within two weeks and present all your witnesses. If you fail to do so, I will strike out your case as weak,” the judge declared, prompting audible murmurs from the packed courtroom.
The day’s session began with the cross-examination of the prosecution’s second witness. However, expectations of a major breakthrough quickly faded as the witness faltered under questioning, frequently responding with “I don’t know” and delivering contradictory statements. Citing concerns over credibility, the court dismissed the witness.
Tensions escalated further when the prosecution failed to present its third witness. Expressing clear displeasure, the judge adjourned the trial to May 28 and 29, with additional dates scheduled for June 6, 16, 18, and 19, 2025. The court also urged the prosecution to streamline its witness list to expedite proceedings. “We cannot continue like this. Reduce your witnesses so this matter can end soon,” the judge advised.
The defense, led by former Attorney General of the Federation, Chief Kanu Agabi (SAN), mounted a vigorous challenge, presenting video evidence to contest the basis of the charges against Kanu.
Among the videos played in court was a controversial remark by Imo State Governor Hope Uzodimma, who had previously accused IPOB of inciting violence in Orlu. In the footage, however, the governor appeared to suggest that the unrest could have been politically motivated. Additional clips featured DSS Director Oluwatosin Ajayi and retired General T.Y. Danjuma urging citizens to defend themselves. The prosecution’s witness refused to comment on the statements, maintaining that interpretation was beyond his responsibility.
During a heated exchange, the defense pressed the witness on the existence of any direct link between Kanu and alleged criminal acts. The witness admitted under oath that he had never personally investigated IPOB members and could not provide any reports directly implicating Kanu in acts of violence.
The case, which has drawn national and international attention, continues to highlight deep legal and political complexities surrounding the IPOB leader’s prosecution.
