The Federal High Court in Abuja witnessed heightened tension on Thursday as the protracted trial of Mazi Nnamdi Kanu, leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), resumed. The presiding judge issued a sharp reprimand to the Federal Government over its lack of progress in the case.
Expressing frustration at the prosecution’s repeated delays and seeming lack of readiness, the judge issued a pointed ultimatum:
“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 statement drew a mixture of murmurs and gasps from those present in the courtroom.
The hearing commenced with the cross-examination of the prosecution’s second witness. However, the session faltered as the witness struggled to respond directly, frequently saying “I don’t know” and contradicting himself. His testimony was ultimately deemed unreliable, and he was dismissed by the court.
The situation deteriorated further when the prosecution failed to present its next witness. Clearly unimpressed, the judge adjourned proceedings to May 28, 29, and June 6, 16, 18, and 19, 2025.
Attempting to move the case forward, the judge urged the prosecution, led by Senior Advocate of Nigeria Adegboyega Awomolo, to reduce its extensive list of witnesses:
“We cannot continue like this. Reduce your witnesses so this matter can end soon.”
On the defense side, the team headed by former Attorney General of the Federation, Chief Kanu Agabi (SAN), came well-prepared. They introduced video footage intended to challenge the legitimacy of the charges against Kanu.
One of the videos showed Imo State Governor Hope Uzodimma, who had previously blamed IPOB for violence in Orlu, now implying that political factors may have influenced the unrest. Other footage featured DSS Director Oluwatosin Ajayi and retired General T.Y. Danjuma encouraging citizens to defend themselves. The prosecution’s witness refrained from commenting, claiming it wasn’t his place to interpret the content.
In cross-examination, the defense questioned the witness on whether any direct evidence tied Kanu to criminal activity. The witness conceded that he had never personally investigated IPOB members and had no reports linking Kanu to violence.
Further undermining the prosecution’s case, the witness also admitted he hadn’t replied to an official inquiry from the Attorney General’s office and had submitted no investigation report to the court.
