The lead Counsel of Nnamdi Kanu, leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra, IPOB, Aloy Ejimakor on Monday explained why Justice Binta Nyako of the Abuja Federal High Court can no longer conduct the trial of the Biafra agitator.

Ejimakor explained that the constitution permits Kanu to be tried within a period, hence the trial of the IPOB leader has extended for years.

He disclosed that Kanu has filed a petition bordering on judicial misconduct against Nyako which is enough to get her off the case.

This is coming when Nyako adjourned Kanu’s trial “sin die.”

Nyako had initially recused herself from Kanu’s trial after the IPOB made the demand in open court last year.

But the judge’s decision was turned down after the Chief Judge of the Federal High Court, John Tsoho refused to accept Kanu’s case file and reassign the matter to another judge.

Consequently, Nyako resumed the hearing on Monday, after which, she adjourned indefinitely.

Reacting, Ejimakor maintained that the judge lacked the constitutional powers to continue with Kanu’s trial.

In a statement he issued, Ejimakor said: “We have been informed by our Client (Mazi Nnamdi Kanu) and we have obtained a copy thereof … that he has initiated a Petition or a Complainant bordering on judicial misconduct against Honorable Justice Binta Murtala-Nyako. This alone, without more, is enough to oust the Justice from subjecting Mazi Kanu to any trial before her court. It is against the rule of natural justice, equity and good conscience (and even the Cons) for a Judge against whom a defendant has preferred a Petition to – before the disposition of such Petition – continue to preside over the trial of such a defendant. This is very easy to understand – for lawyers and lay people alike. Compare and contrast with someone being a judge in his or her own case, or being a Judge over you when she is a defendant in the case you initiated against her. The Petition or Complaint was filed on 14th January 2025 and it is pending.

“As a BACKGROUND to the current impasse, below are the reasons Mazi Nnamdi Kanu had to take the drastic step of requesting the RECUSAL:

“First, back in June 2021, the same Judge conducted a hearing by which Mazi Kanu (an awaiting-trial) was ordered remanded without notice to, and the presence of his former Counsel (of record) at the hearing. That was a grave constitutional error that turned highly prejudicial against Mazi Kanu and it continues to be constitutionally injurious to him to this day.

“Second, Mazi Kanu was ordered detained in DSS cell instead of a prison facility as the law contemplates. The excuse then (which – by the way – fell outside the exceptions) was that every penitentiary in Nigeria is porous or pathetically low-security. This excuse suggested a judicial state of mind that imputed a proclivity for jailbreak to Mazi Kanu. That’s wrong and unacceptable.

“Third, when the DSS detention posed grave risks to Mazi Kanu’s constitutional right to fair hearing and to Counsel, the Judge summarily refused his application for transfer to prison or other less restrictive facility and instead ordered an accelerated trial. That’s manifest injustice.

“Fourth, when the Supreme Court ruled against Mazi Kanu’s bail revocation, the same Judge who had revoked his bail refused to reinstate the bail. That’s an egregious violation of the Constitution and the doctrine of stare decisis.

“Fifth, the Supreme Court had held that, by revoking Mazi Kanu’s bail, the Judge’s impartiality has become suspect. In the face of this damning indictment from the apex court, it would amount to a dangerous gamble for Mazi Nnamdi Kanu to ignore this and take his chances in a trial that has six capital offenses arrayed against him.

“And sixth, despite the enormous risks to Mazi Kanu’s right to fair trial posed by the strict conditions of his detention at the DSS and the illegality of the charges, the Judge summarily refused our meritorious application to adjourn the trial until the exhaustion our appeal challenging her jurisdiction to try the case. For Mazi Kanu, this is the last straw that broke the camel’s back.

“Above all, when Mazi Nnamdi Kanu was presented in Court on 29th June 2021, following his rendition from Kenya, the Court had a duty to make inquiries regarding the locale of his “arrested” (whether in Nigeria or abroad); and if abroad, whether his “arrest and surrender” to Nigeria complied with the pertinent laws of the country of his refuge, as well as that of Nigeria and the international laws on point. We are aware that the Court never made such inquiry because if it did, it would have revealed the earliest indication of the infamous extraordinary rendition that has complicated jurisdiction to this day. You will recall that the former Attorney-General had falsely claimed that Mazi Nnamdi Kanu was lawfully extradited. If not for the dexterity of one Mazi Nnamdi Kanu’s Counsel who had told Nigerians what actually happened, this grave falsity would have persisted as the truth to this day.

“The post-recusal Summons issued to Mazi Nnamdi Kanu that brought us to Court on 10th February 2024 cannot be blamed on the Court alone. The prosecution grandfathered it by a Letter it wrote to the Court on 5th December 2024, requesting that the case be re-calendared for a hearing before Justice Murtala-Nyako. In our reaction and after a considered view that the said Letter strained the boundaries of prosecutorial misconduct, we countered with a reply, vehemently opposing the re-calendaring the case to be heard before a Judge who is bound by an extant Order of recusal.

“In our efforts to stave off what we reckoned to be burgeoning unconstitutionality that lies in sending the case back to the recused Judge, we took the responsible step of generating a Letter to the Honorable Chief Judge of the Federal High Court, requesting for transfer of the case to the Southeast. We took this step because we were reliably informed that the “official” reason for sending the case back to the recused Judge is because no other Judge in the Abuja Division of the Federal High Court is willing to take the case. And the reason why Southeast is in play (to the exclusion of other zones) is because, being the place where the offenses were alleged to have impact, it possesses far superior jurisdiction to every other division, including Abuja.”

Highlighting the solution to the impasse, Ejimakor reiterate that Kanu’s trial should be transferred to the Southeast if no judge is willing to take it up.

He added: “Having come thus far, the next logical question is: What’s the way forward? The answers are simple and they are as follows:

“If no Judge (other the recused Judge) in Abuja is willing to try the case, the next lawful thing to do is to – on the authority of Section 45, Federal High Court Act & James Ibori v. FRN – transfer the case to any of the Federal High Court divisions in the Southeast.

“If there’s some sort of a “secret official embargo” in having Mazi Nnamdi Kanu tried in the Southeast, you cannot keep him in an endless limbo while he’s detained as an awaiting-trial. Awaiting which trial? A trial that cannot happen in Abuja or Southeast?

“In every common law country, when a State has an insurmountable difficulty in putting a detainee on trial within a reasonable time, the next responsible and lawful option is to release such a detainee until such a time his trial can be properly conducted, subject to any statute of limitation that may be applicable.

“Under the Constitution, every criminal suspect, especially a detainee, deserves to be tried within a reasonable time, not an indefinite time, not being in detention for almost four years awaiting trial that never happens for no fault of the detainee but of the State. Additionally, the Administration of Criminal Justice Act prescribed a day-to-day trial for every criminal suspect. It becomes more urgent and compelling when such a suspect is in detention, and a lengthy to boot.

“In summation, we make bold to say that the ball is firmly and exclusively in the court of the Federal Government, in the sense that since it has proved unable to bring Mazi Nnamdi Kanu to trial within a reasonable time, then the next best thing (which is also lawful and constitutional) is to end this whole saga honorably by releasing Mazi Nnamdi Kanu either through restoration of his bail or otherwise – by a discontinuance of a case that was burdened by the indices of internecine politics from its inception ten years ago in 2015.”

The Minister of Aviation and Aerospace Development, Festus Keyamo, has distanced himself from campaign posters promoting his alleged governorship ambition in Delta State.

The Minister’s Special Assistant on Political Matters, Voke Oshasha, in a press statement on Monday, described the posters as “fake” and a cheap act of blackmail by those seeking to make Delta APC their personal estate.

Dismissing the speculation, he stated that the intention behind the posters is to misrepresent the minister’s and other Delta APC leaders’ efforts to make the party more inclusive, rather than allowing it to remain under the control of a single individual.

Oshasha said in the statement: “Our attention has been drawn to some fake posters circulating online, suggesting that the Minister of Aviation and Aerospace Development, Olorogun Festus Keyamo, SAN, is interested in running for Governor of Delta State in 2027 on the platform of the APC.

“Nothing could be further from the truth. This is cheap blackmail by those who want to turn Delta APC into their personal estate. Their strategy is to distort the Minister’s and other leaders’ genuine efforts to open up the party for all members to participate freely, instead of leaving it in the grip of a single individual.

“Mr Keyamo has a long history of fighting military dictatorships and injustice, alongside President Bola Ahmed Tinubu of NADECO fame, and he has no reservations about resisting civilian dictatorship either.”

He avowed that the APC leaders in Delta” have built a formidable alliance to prevent the party’s decline in the state.”

He added: “For emphasis: no one is excluded or shut out. That is the simple message. Everyone must work collectively, rather than kneeling in someone’s village to form structures or beg for tickets. Democratic ideals must shine through in Delta APC.

“All current blackmail attempts will not deter the Minister from collaborating with others to achieve these important goals.”

However, some stakeholders believe the minister may be testing the waters under the APC banner ahead of the 2027 election. They interpret the posters as a potential challenge to former Deputy Senate President Ovie Omo-Agege, who is also believed to have gubernatorial ambitions.

Priscilla Ojo, the daughter of popular Nigerian actress, Iyabo Ojo, has reacted to the backlash received following the absence of her father, Ademidun Ojo at her wedding.

DAILY POST reports that Priscilla tied the knot with her lover, singer Juma Jux, in an Islamic ceremony in Tanzania on Friday.

However, her father’s absence at the ceremony fueled rumors of a strained relationship, with many users accusing her of sidelining her father in her wedding preparations.

Ademidun Ojo’s absence sparked debates about a possible rift between him and his ex-wife, Iyabo Ojo.

Responding to the criticism, Priscilla on her Snapchat story, shared the screenshot of a video call with her father on Sunday evening.

DAILY POST recalls that in 2023, Iyabo Ojo during an interview with media personality, Toke Makinwa described her marriage with Ademidun as her first encounter with poverty.

The Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), Ondo State chapter, has expressed concern over the silence of Governor Lucky Aiyedatiwa on the alleged padding of the 2025 budget.

The party pointed out that the 2025 budget contains some scandalous items in the office of the Commissioner for Finance. 

Speaking via a statement by its Publicity Secretary, Kennedy Peretei, the party insisted that the people of the state deserve explanation on the ₦11.5 billion allocated to the Ministry of Finance as security vote.

They insisted that ₦250 million as “Honorarium and sitting Allowance in the Ministry of Finance” and the procurement of SUV worth ₦230 million for Commissioner of Finance is insensitive.

Peretei subsequently called for the sack of the Financial Commissioner over the development, stressing that the funds belong to the people of Ondo State.

He said, “The Ondo State 2025 Appropriation Act contains some scandalous items in the office of the Commissioner for Finance that have been the subject of public agitation in the last two weeks.

“The Lucky Aiyedatiwa government has maintained such a deafening silence and complicity that are making tongues wag, if indeed there is more to it that meets the eye.

“The N11.5B Security Vote in the Ministry of Finance captured in the 2025 Approved Budget has not been explained to the people of the State, in spite of the public outcry.

“The provision of N250M as Honorarium and Sitting Allowance in the Ministry of Finance is another padded item in the budget for the enjoyment and pleasure of the Commissioner.

“Perhaps, the most insensitive of the items is the procurement of 1 No Toyota Prado SUV Jeep for the Honorable Commissioner for Finance at a princely sum of N230M.

“In view of the above approved Budgetary allocations, the Peoples Democratic Party, PDP, Ondo State Chapter believes that Mrs Isaac Omowunmi, the Ondo State Commissioner for Finance must be sacked immediately, for criminally abusing her office. Her claim of being a UK trained Accountant falls flat on its back, if all she can do is to fleece the people’s Treasury. The supposed Gatekeeper of our Treasury.

“If Governor Lucky Aiyedatiwa fails to relieve the Commissioner of her duties, having failed the people of the Sunshine State, steps will be taken to prove that, what is at stake is the people’s funds.”

[NaijaNews]