Nnamdi Kanu’s New Legal Move a “Risky Gamble” — Inibehe Effiong

Human rights lawyer Inibehe Effiong has expressed concern over the decision of IPOB leader, Mazi Nnamdi Kanu, to abandon his earlier plan to call witnesses in his terrorism trial at the Federal High Court in Abuja.

Kanu, who had requested time to review his case file and even applied for witness summons, told the court on Monday that he no longer intends to call any witnesses, insisting there is “no valid charge” against him.

Effiong, reacting in a post on X, said the shift in defence strategy was unsettling.

The court had previously scheduled October 27 for Kanu to open his defence after years of legal battle over terrorism allegations brought by the Federal Government.

“Kanu’s legal strategy is confusing at this point,” he wrote, warning that the move amounts to a “very risky gamble.”

“The Court had previously overruled his No Case Submission.

“It is no longer open to him to contend that he has no case to answer.

“There are two options that he can explore: either he opens his defence, or he rests his case on the case of the prosecution.

“He has indicated that he no longer intends to open his defence.

“My understanding of the media reports of today’s proceedings is that Kanu believes that the prosecution has not proved the charges against him beyond reasonable doubt.

“If my assessment is wrong, then palpable confusion has ensued.

“However, the law is firmly settled that a defendant has no obligation to prove or establish his or her innocence.

“Since this defendant, Kanu, had pleaded not guilty to the charges, the court will now have to examine the evidence adduced by the prosecution to see whether the elements of the offences charged have been proven beyond reasonable doubt.

“The fact that Kanu has elected to pursue his case in this manner is not going to be construed as an admission of guilt.

“However, the evidence adduced by the prosecution team would be deemed as unchallenged, save for the evidence elicited under cross examination.

“The court will still have to determine whether on the basis of the admitted evidence, the prosecution has discharged the burden of proof placed on it in law.

“I don’t know who’s advising Kanu, or what his motivation is, but he is taking a very risky decision.”