Biafra: Court Grants Nnamdi Kanu Unconditional Bail

Leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Mr. Nnamdi Kanu

Senator Iroegbu in Abuja

A Federal High Court (FHC) in Abuja has ordered the unconditional release of the leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Mr. Nnamdi Kanu from the custody of the Department of State Security Service.

Kanu who is also the Director of Radio Biafra was ordered to be released immediately by Justice Adeniyi Ademola.

Delivering ruling in a bail application filed and argued by his lawyer, Vincent Obeta, Justice Ademola also set aside an order earlier granted the DSS to detain Kanu for 90 days to enable the security agency complete their investigation.

According to him, the continued detention of Kanu after three months without trial, violated section 158 of the Administration of Criminal Justice (ACJ) Act 2015 and section 35 of the 1999 constitution .

Justice ademola also said that there was no law that permits the DSS or any other security agency for that matter to detain any nigerian beyond the period stipulated by the constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, when in actual fact there was no intention to put the person on trial .

"From the available facts before the court, it is clear that the DSS either enough materials to prosecute the applicant in a law court or yet to make up their mind on prosecution.

"Detaining the applicant for more than three months without trial runs contrary to Section 34 of the 1999 Constitution as amended, and such act must not be allowed in the interest of the rule of law.

"Constitution remains the supreme law. It does not permit detention of a Nigerian citizen for a period spanning over two months without charging the citizen before the law court. This court has the duty to protect the constitution and one of the duties is to admit a citizen of this country on bail when his right to freedom is being violated," Justice Ademola said.

The Judge however frowned at the claim of Kanu that Terrorism Prevention Act 2013 (Amended) was illegal, adding that the Act is a potent legislation fashioned out to check acts of terrorism.

"It is worthy of mention that countries like America, Britain, France and others have similar legislation to combat Acts of Terrorism. It is therefore not a correct position, to say that the Act is an illegal one," he said.