The Federal Government, yesterday, arraigned the leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra, IPOB, Mr. Nnamdi Kanu, before a Justice James Tsoho led prosecution at the Abuja Division of the Federal High Court on a six-count criminal charge bordering on treasonable felony.
In the charge, the Federal Government alleged that the accused persons committed treasonable felony by spear-heading an illegal agitation for the seccession of ‘Biafra Republic’ from Nigeria, an offence punishable under Section 41(C) of the Criminal Code Act, CAP C38 Laws of the Federation of Nigeria.
The Federal Government alleged Nnamdi kanu, Benjamin Madubugwu and David Nwawuisi. were accused of managing the affairs of IPOB, which it described as ‘an unlawful society.’
But after the accused persons pleaded innocence to the charge, yesterday, Director of Public Prosecution, DPP, Mr. Mohammed Diri. who is personally prosecuting the case for the government, applied for them to remain in custody of the Department of State Services, DSS, pending the determination of the case against them.
Diri insisted that it would be more convenient for the prosecution to produce the accused persons to court from the DSS detention facility for trial than from Kuje prison.
He cited security reasons, saying that anything could happen on the way while bringing the Mr Nnamdi Kanu to court from the prison.
He said “‘The nature of the offence and the response of friends, relatives and sympathisers of the defendants that we have seen, particularly when the case was before the Magistrate’s Court, is what has prompted this application.
“I have no personal interest against the accused persons. I am only doing my job as the prosecutor and the DPP of the federation,” Diri said.
But Nnamdi Kanu counsel, Chief Chuks Muoma, opposed Mr Diri application. He stated that his client would rather prefer to be remanded in prison custody than a DSS facility.
At the end after listening to both parties, Justice James Tsoho, over-ruled the DPP and remanded the Mr Nnamdi Kanu in Kuje prison.
He said ”’I have given due consideration to arguments by the two counsels. It is my respectful view that after arraignment, the appropriate and constitutional pace for remand of an accused person is the prison except when there is an extra-ordinary reason.
”It is my view that the complainant have all it takes to provide logistic and security requirements not withstanding the distance between the prison and the court.
”Therefore, application for remand of the defendants in DSS custody is refused. Accordingly, the defendants are hereby remanded in Kuje prison pending trial.'''
The matter was adjourned till next Monday to entertain arguments on whether or not to release the accused persons on bail pending hearing and determination of the charge against him.
