Aloy Ejimakor, lawyer to Nnamdi Kanu, chief of the Indigenous Folks of Biafra, IPOB, has disclosed that the agitator is able to show to the world that he didn’t bounce bail in 2017.
Talking completely with RexGists, the lawyer mentioned the IPOB chief will show that the Nigerian authorities made him flee Nigeria.
Ejimakor mentioned the navy invasion of Kanu’s residence and risk to his life made him unable to attend his trials and flee Nigeria.
Kanu was arrested and arraigned in court docket for prices bordering on treason in 2017.
Justice Binta Nyako of an Abuja Federal Excessive Court docket had granted him bail in 2017.
Kanu, nevertheless, did not proceed his trial after a navy invasion of his house in Afaraukwu, Abia State.
After the navy invasion, the IPOB chief fled the nation to Europe, the place he operated and coordinated his agitation for Biafra from.
Few weeks in the past, he was captured by the Nigerian authorities in an African nation believed to be Kenya and repatriated to Nigeria to proceed his trial earlier than Justice Nyako.
Upon his return, Justice Nyako had ordered that he must be remanded within the custody of the Division of State Companies, DSS.
Amid this, there have been wild speculations that Kanu jumped bail in 2017.
Nonetheless, Ejimakor dismissed the claims of leaping bail, stressing that the risk to Kanu’s life made him flee the nation.
Ejimakor mentioned: “Regardless of what he has handed by way of, Nnamdi Kanu was in excessive spirits after I met with him yesterday, July 17; and he’s trying ahead to the primary alternative to debunk this entire story of him leaping bail. So far, he has by no means had such a possibility whilst he had beforehand requested it within the correct discussion board.
“In my thought of view, Kanu by no means jumped bail, one thing made him to flee Nigeria and never attend his trial in October in 2017.
“That one thing was the navy invasion of his homestead, which was subsequently dropped at the eye of the court docket in an utility that was by no means heard to this present day.
“So, maybe, this entire unlucky incident would supply the primary alternative to ventilate this nagging query of leaping bail, as it’s going to simply be proven that Kanu by no means made a voluntary resolution to not attend his trial. Leaping bail takes some kind of voluntary act on the a part of the defendant.
“Kanu’s case is solely a case of involuntary act or omission introduced by the actions of the Nigerian authorities that had him on trial and thus held an abiding authorized curiosity for him to stay in Nigeria to take his trial. In reality, it’s the similar Nigerian authorities that claims Kanu jumped bail and thus seeks to profit from it that destroyed Kanu’s capability or obligation to seem at his trial.
“On the preponderance of the proof, it might be unreasonable for anyone to conclude that Kanu jumped bail. It’s not a case of leaping bail simpliciter. Relatively, it’s a clear case of an antagonistic occasion forcing Kanu to flee, solely to show round and accuse him of leaping bail.
“Should you recover from the problem of Kanu leaping bail, then the bench warrant upon which his rendition from Kenya was grounded would, in hindsight, be seen to be improper. It’s a causal chain. Kanu was free on bond, the federal government invaded his house and to his credit score, he efficiently fled from the hazard. However as an alternative of giving him a listening to on why he fled, you declare him a fugitive and finally rendition him on account of that. That’s not acceptable. The federal government can’t revenue from its personal improper.
“The rendition can’t stand as a result of this whole factor was attributable to the invasion and never by Kanu. However even when he jumped bail, extradition, not extraordinary rendition is the one authorized pathway to forcing him again to Nigeria. However I can inform you that within the distinctive circumstances of Kanu, any extradition proceedings, both in Britain or Kenya, would have been summarily denied. That’s in all probability why Nigeria by no means bothered to use for it. Higher but, extraordinary rendition could also be a Pyrrhic victory however in the long term, it creates a helluva of authorized, political and diplomatic issues for any individuals or entities complicit in it.”