Headline

Why I Listed Sanwo-Olu, Wike, Umahi, Military Chiefs, Others As My Witnesses – Nnamdi Kanu

Published

4 months ago

October 23, 2025

Eric

Incarcerated leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), lNnamdi Kanu, has explained why he wants governors, ministers and former military chiefs among notable personalities he listed as witnesses in his terrorism case.

The IPOB leader, whose no-case submission was dismissed by Justice James Omotosho, is due to open his defence on the trial.

Ministers Nyesom Wike (FCT), David Umahi (Works), former Army chiefs Gen. Theophilus Danjuma and Gen. Tukur Buratai are among the 23 witnesses whose names were frontloaded by the IPOB leader.

Also listed as witnesses are Imo State Governor Hope Uzodinma, Lagos State Governor Babajide Sanwo-Olu, former Abia State Governor Okezie Ikpeazu, former Attorney General of the Federation, Abubakar Malami, Director-General of the Director of State Service (DSS) Oluwatosin Ajayi, his predecessor, Yusuf Bichi, and former Director General of the National Intelligence Agency (NIA) Ahmed Rufai Abubakar.

In a document filed on Wednesday, which he personally signed, Kanu prayed the court to extend the six days earlier granted him to conduct his defence to 90 days.

Justice Omotosho at the last hearing, granted his request for a private meeting with his team of lawyers on October 22 in the courtroom of the Federal High Court in Abuja, preparatory for today’s commencement of his defence.

In the document, Kanu categorised his witnesses into two: “ordinary, but material defence witnesses (voluntary) and “material and vital witnesses (to be summoned under Section 232 of the Evidence Act 2011).”

He also indicated his intention to testify in person.

According to the document, Kanu said he plans to call Wike “to testify on the Obigbo Massacre, following the EndSARS protests and the role of security forces under his authority.”

He said Uzodinma is “to testify on public statements, following Ahmed Gulak’s death and subsequent clarification exonerating IPOB.”

See also Why I reinstated Lamido Sanusi as Kano Emir – Governor

Kanu said he would be inviting Gen. Danjuma “to testify on his 2018 public warning, urging self-defence against infiltrated armed forces, contextualizing the defendant’s advocacy for self-defence.”

He said Buratai would “testify on the 2017 invasion of the defendant’s residence and the chain of command authorizing the military operation.”

Kanu said Sanwo-Olu will “testify on the findings of the Lagos State EndSARS Judicial Panel, particularly the Lekki Toll-Gate massacre, evidencing state patter of repression.”

Umahi is scheduled “to testify regarding the proscription of IPOB without judicial order and its consequences,” while Ikpeazu will “testify on his knowledge and administrative participation In the 2017 military invasion within Abia State.”

Kanu wants Malami “to testify on directives and authorizations connected with the defendant’s extraordinary rendition from Kenya in June 2021.”

Also, Ajayi is being invited “to clarify on his pubic lectures and statements on terrorists and invaders, relevant to interpreting the defendant’s own broadcasts.”

Kanu said Bichi should “testify on knowledge and authorization of rendition operations, custody conditions, and compliance with legal procedures.”

He said Abubakar is expected” to testify on the operational and diplomatic coordination of the rendition.”

Kanu said a DSS official, whose name he failed to disclose, will be invited “to be cross-examined regarding direct involvement in the defendant’s abduction and illegal transfer, fabrication of witness statements, and custodial abuses.”

Those he listed as ordinary witnesses include Chief Emeka Umeagbalasi, who he described as an “expert in political history and self-determination.”

According to the document, Umeagbalasi “will testify on the historical and legal context of self-determination movements (such as IPOB) and their treatment under Nigerian and international law, including extra-judicial killings of the defendant’s associates.”

See also National Assembly transmits amended electoral bill to President Buhari for assent

Mazi Benjamin Madubugwu, an”associate of the defendant and former co-accused” is expected to “testify to the internal structure and objectives of IPOB, refuting claims that it is a terrorist organization.”

Chief Dan Ulasi, a community leader in Umuahia, Abia State, is being invited to “testify on the perception of the defendant’s broadcasts as political commentary rather than incitement.”

Bruce Fein, described as an international human rights and constitutional lawyer, based in Washington, D.C., United States, would “testify on the illegality of the defendant’s extraordinary rendition and its implications for jurisdiction and fair trial.”

Emeritus Professor Martin Aghaji, who Kanu said is his “treating physician,” is to “testify on the defendant’s medical condition, effects of detention, and fitness to stand trial.”

Barry Sutton, a “digital-security expert at the Massachussets Institute of Technology, Massachussets MA, USA, would “examine the integrity of the electronic evidence, including chain of custody, authenticity, and tampering issues.”

Chief Godwin I. Chionye, described as a “senior lawyer and community elder” from Isiama Afaraukwu Ibeku Umuahia, Abia State, is to “testify on the defendant’s good character and standing in his community.”

Prince Emmanuel Kanu of No. 1 Eze Okwu-Kanu Close, Umuahia, Abia State, described as an “eyewitness to the 2017 military invasion of the defendant’s residence,” is expected to “testify to the events, casualties, and use of excessive force by the army.”

Kanu said he will, in his testimony, provide “a sworn account of the facts, denying the allegations, and explaining the political context of his statements and actions.”

Part of the document reads: “Notice of number and names of witnesses to be called by the defendant and request for witness summons/subpoena and the variation of the time within which to defend the counts/charges against the defendant.

See also Good morning! Here Are Major News Headlines In Nigerian Newspapers Today: Supreme court sacks Bwacha as Taraba APC governorship candidate

“Take notice that pursuant to the order of this honourable court made on the 16th day of October 2025, directing the defendant to commence his defence on the 24th day of October 2025, the defendant shall call a total of twenty three (23) witnesses, divided into two categories, viz:

*Category A – ordinary, but material defence witnesses (voluntary).

*Category B – vital and compellable witnesses (to be summoned under Section 232 of the Evidence Act, 2011).

“Given the materiality of the prospective evidence of the witnesses slated for the defence of the defendant, the time frame within which the defendant is ordered to present and conduct defence of the charges appears grossly inadequate, hence your lordship is urged to vary the timeframe and accommodate at least a period of 90 days for the defence.

“The Registrar of the of the court be ordered to issue subpoenas or witness summons on Category B witnesses or be permitted

“The defendant respectfully prays this honourable court to issue all necessary summonses and witness warrants under Sections 241-242 of the Evidence Act, 2011 and under the inherent jurisdiction

“The defendant undertakes to provide the sworn statements of all voluntary witnesses to this honourable court and to notify the prosecution within a reasonable time.

“The honourable court to note that the appearance of these witnesses is essential to ensuring a fair and complete determination of the issues before the court and the honourable court and the entirety of Nigeria will enjoy the robust evidence that would surface.

“No precious time of the honourable court would be delayed and it would interest the honourable court and the general public that justice is not only done but manifestly seen to have been done.”

Headline

Opposition Parties Reject 2026 Electoral Act, Demand Fresh Amendment

Published

12 hours ago

February 26, 2026

Eric

Opposition political parties have rejected the 2026 Electoral Act recently passed by the National Assembly, which President Bola Tinubu swiftly signed into law.

The parties called on the National Assembly to immediately begin a fresh amendment process to remove what they described as “all obnoxious provisions” in the law.

Their position was made known at a press briefing themed “Urgent Call to Save Nigeria’s Democracy,” held at the Transcorp Hilton Hotel in Abuja on Thursday.

In a communiqué read by the Chairman of the New Nigeria Peoples Party (NNPP) Ahmed Ajuji, the opposition leaders stated:

“We demand that the National Assembly immediately commence a fresh amendment to the Electoral Act 2026, to remove all obnoxious provisions and ensure that the Act reflects only the will and aspiration of Nigerians for free, fair, transparent and credible electoral process in our country. Nothing short of this will be acceptable to Nigerians.”

Some of the opposition leaders present in at the event include former Senate President David Mark; former Governor of Osun State, Rauf Aregbesola; former Vice President Atiku Abubakar; former Governor of Rivers State, Chibuike Rotimi Amaechi; and former Governor of Anambra State, Peter Obi, all from the African Democratic Congress (ADC).

The National Chairman of the New Nigeria Peoples Party (NNPP), Ahmed Ajuji, and other prominent members of the NNPP, notably Buba Galadima, were also in attendance.

The coalition said the amended law, signed by Bola Tinubu, contains “anti-democratic” clauses, which they argue may weaken electoral transparency and public confidence in the voting system.

At the centre of the opposition’s concerns is the amendment to Section 60(3), which allows presiding officers to rely on manual transmission of election results where there is communication failure.

According to the coalition, the provision weakens the mandatory electronic transmission of results and could create loopholes for manipulation.

They argued that Nigeria’s electoral technology infrastructure is sufficient to support nationwide electronic transmission, citing previous assurances by officials of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC).

The parties also rejected the amendment to Section 84, which restricts political parties to direct primaries and consensus methods for candidate selection.

They described the change as an unconstitutional intrusion into the internal affairs of parties, insisting that indirect primaries remain a legitimate democratic option.

The opposition cited alleged irregularities in the recent Federal Capital Territory local government elections as evidence of what they described as a broader pattern of electoral compromise.

They characterised the polls as a “complete fraud” and said the outcome has deepened their lack of confidence in the ability of the electoral system to deliver credible elections in 2027.

The coalition also condemned reported attacks on leaders of the African Democratic Congress in Edo State, describing the incidents as a serious threat to democratic participation and political tolerance.

They warned that increasing violence against opposition figures could destabilise the political environment if not urgently addressed.

In their joint statement, the opposition parties pledged to pursue “every constitutional means” to challenge the Electoral Act 2026 and safeguard voters’ rights.

“We will not be intimidated,” the leaders said, urging civil society organisations and citizens to support efforts aimed at protecting Nigeria’s democratic system.

On February 18, 2026, President Bola Tinubu signed the Electoral Act (Amendment) 2026 into law following its passage by the National Assembly. The Act introduced several reforms, including statutory recognition of the Bimodal Voter Accreditation System and revised election timelines.

However, opposition figures such as Atiku Abubakar and Peter Obi have also called for further amendments, particularly over the manual transmission fallback clause, which critics say leaves room for manipulation.

The president said the law will strengthen democracy and prevent voter disenfranchisement.

Tinubu defended manual collation of results, questioned Nigeria’s readiness for full real-time electronic transmission, and warned against technical glitches and hacking.

The Electoral Act sparked intense debate in the National Assembly over how election results should be transmitted ahead of the 2027 general elections.

Civil society groups under the “Occupy NASS” campaign demanded real-time transmission to curb manipulation.

In the Senate, lawmakers clashed during consideration of Clause 60, which allows manual transmission of results if electronic transmission fails.

Senator Enyinnaya Abaribe (ADC, Abia South) demanded a formal vote to remove the proviso permitting manual transmission, arguing against weakening real-time electronic reporting.

The move led to a heated exchange on the floor, with Senate President Godswill Akpabio initially suggesting the demand had been withdrawn.

After procedural disputes and a brief confrontation among senators, a division was conducted. Fifteen opposition senators voted against retaining the manual transmission proviso, while 55 supported it, allowing the clause to stand.

Earlier proceedings had briefly stalled during clause-by-clause review, prompting consultations and a closed-door session.

In the House of Representatives, a similar disagreement came up over a motion to rescind an earlier decision that mandated compulsory real-time electronic transmission of results to IReV.

Although the “nays” were louder during a voice vote, Speaker Tajudeen Abbas ruled in favour of rescinding the decision, triggering protests and an executive session.

Headline

AFP: How Tinubu’s Govt Paid Boko Haram ‘Huge’ Ransom, Released Two Terrorists for Kidnapped Saint Mary’s Pupils

Published

3 days ago

February 24, 2026

Eric

The Nigerian government paid Boko Haram militants a “huge” ransom of millions of dollars to free up to 230 children and staff the jihadists abducted from a Catholic school in November, an AFP investigation revealed Monday.

Two Boko Haram commanders were also freed as part of the deal, which goes against the country’s own law banning payments to kidnappers. The money was delivered by helicopter to Boko Haram’s Gwoza stronghold in northeastern Borno state on the border with Cameroon, intelligence sources told AFP.

The decision to pay the militants is likely to irritate US President Donald Trump, who ordered air strikes on jihadists in northern Nigeria on Christmas Day and has been sent military trainers to help support Nigerian forces.

Nigerian government officials deny any ransom was paid to the armed gang that snatched close to 300 schoolchildren and staff from St. Mary’s boarding school in Papiri in central Niger state on November 21. At least 50 later managed to escape their captors.

Boko Haram has not been previously linked to the kidnapping, but sources told AFP one of its most feared commanders was behind the mass abduction: the notorious jihadist known as Sadiku.

He infamously held up a train from the capital in 2022 and netted hefty ransoms for the release of government officials and other well-off passengers.

Boko Haram, which has waged a bloody insurgency since 2009, is strongest in northeast Nigeria.

But a cell in central Niger state operates under Sadiku’s leadership. The St. Mary’s pupils and staff were freed after two weeks of negotiations led by Nuhu Ribadu, Nigeria’s National Security Adviser, with the government insisting no ransom was paid. Nigeria’s State Security Service flatly denied paying any money, saying “government agents don’t pay ransoms”.

However, four intelligence sources familiar with the talks told AFP the government paid a “huge” ransom to get the pupils back. One source put it at 40 million naira per head – around $7 million in total.

Another put the figure lower at two billion naira overall. The money was delivered by chopper to Ali Ngulde, a Boko Haram commander in the northeast, three sources told AFP.

Due to the lack of communications cover in the remote area, Ngulde had to cross into Cameroon to confirm delivery of the ransom before the first group of 100 children were released.

Nigeria has long been plagued by mass abductions, with criminals and jihadist groups sometimes working together to extort millions from hostages’ families, and authorities seemingly powerless to stop them.

Source: Africanews

Headline

Unlawful Invasion: El-Rufai Drags ICPC, IGP, Others to Court, Demands N1bn Damages

Published

4 days ago

February 23, 2026

Eric

Former Governor of Kaduna State, Nasir El-Rufai, has slammed a ₦1 billion fundamental rights enforcement suit against the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC) for what he claimed was an unlawful invasion of his Abuja residence.

El-Rufai, in a suit filed at the Federal High Court in Abuja, also listed the Chief Magistrate, Magistrate’s Court of the FCT, Abuja Magisterial District; Inspector-General of Police, and the Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF) as 2nd to 4th respondents respectively.

According to the suit filed through his lawyers, led by Oluwole Iyamu, El-Rufai prayed the court to declare that the search warrant issued on February 4 by the Chief Magistrate, Magistrate’s Court of the FCT (2nd respondent), authorising the search and seizure at his residence as invalid, null and void.

Security operatives had stormed and searched the former Governor’s residence in the ongoing investigations against him.

However, he argued in the case marked: FHC/ABJ/CS/345/2026, that the search was in violation of Section 37 of the Constitution, and urged the court to declare that the search warrant was “null and void for lack of particularity, material drafting errors, ambiguity in execution parameters, overbreadth, and absence of probable cause thereby constituting an unlawful and unreasonable search.”

In the suit dated and filed February 20 by Iyamu, ex-governor, who is currently under detention, sought seven reliefs.

He prayed the court to declare that the invasion and search of his residence at House 12, Mambilla Street, Aso Drive, Abuja, on Feb. 19 at about 2pm and executed by agents of ICPC and I-G, “under the aforesaid invalid warrant, amounts to a gross violation of the applicant’s fundamental rights to dignity of the human person, personal liberty, fair hearing, and privacy under Sections 34, 35, 36, and 37 of the Constitution.”

He urged the court to declare that “any evidence obtained pursuant to the aforesaid invalid warrant and unlawful search is inadmissible in any proceedings against the applicant, as it was procured in breach of constitutional safeguards.”

El-Rufai, therefore, sought an order of injunction restraining the respondents and their agents from further relying on, using, or tendering any evidence or items seized during the unlawful search in any investigation, prosecution, or proceedings involving him.

“An order directing the Ist and 3rd respondents (ICPC and I-G) to forthwith return all items seized from the applicant’s premises during the unlawful search, together with a detailed inventory thereof.

“An order awarding the sum of N1,000,000,000.00 (One Billion Naira) as general, exemplary, and aggravated damages against the respondents jointly and severally for the violations of the applicant’s fundamental rights, including trespass, unlawful seizure, and the resultant psychological trauma, humiliation, distress, infringement of privacy, and reputational harm.”

The breakdown of the ₦1 billion in damages includes “a N300 million as compensatory damages for psychological trauma, emotional distress, and loss of personal security;

“A ₦400 million as exemplary damages to deter future misconduct by law enforcement agencies and vindicate the applicant’s rights.

“A ₦300 million as aggravated damages for the malicious, high-handed and oppressive nature of the respondents’ actions, including the use of a patently defective warrant procured through misleading representations.”

He equally sought ₦100 million as the cost of filing the suit, including legal fees and associated expenses.

Iyamu argued that the search warrant was fundamentally defective, lacking specificity in the description of items to be seized, containing material typographical errors, ambiguous execution terms, overbroad directives, and no verifiable probable cause.

He added that the warrant violated Sections 143-148 of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA), 2015; Section 36 of the Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences (ICPC) Act, 2000, and constitutional protections against arbitrary intrusions and several other constitutional provisions.

“Section 146 stipulates that the warrant must be in the prescribed form, free from defects that could mislead, but the document is riddled with errors in the address, date, and district designation;

“Section 147 allows direction to specified persons, but the warrant’s indiscriminate addressing to “all officers is overbroad and unaccountable.

“Section 148 permits execution at reasonable times, but the contradictory language creates ambiguity, undermining procedural clarity,” he submitted.

Iyamu stated that the execution of the invalid warrant on Feb. 19 resulted in an unlawful invasion of his client’s premises, constituting violations of the rights to dignity (Section 34), personal liberty (Section 35), fair hearing (Section 36), and privacy (Section 37) of the Constitution.

He further argued that the search was conducted without legal justification and in a manner that inflicted humiliation and distress.

“Evidence obtained without a valid warrant is unlawful and inadmissible, as established in judicial precedents such as C.O.P. v. Omoh (1969) NCLR 137, where the court ruled that evidence procured through improper means contravenes fundamental rights and must be excluded,” he said.

In the affidavit in support of the application, Mohammed Shaba, a Principal Secretary to the former governor, averred that on Feb. 19 at about 2p.m., officers from the ICPC and Nigeria Police Force invaded the residence under a purported search warrant issued on or about Feb. 4.

According to him, the said warrant is invalid due to its lack of specificity, errors, and other defects as outlined in the grounds of this application.

He said the “search warrant did not specify the properties or items being searched for.”

Shaba stated that the officers failed to submit themselves for search as provided by the law before proceeding with the search.

“That the Magistrate did not specify the magisterial district wherein he sits.

“That during the invasion, the officers searched the applicant’s premises without lawful authority, seized personal items including documents and electronic devices, and caused the applicant undue humiliation, psychological trauma, and distress.

“Now shown to me and marked as ‘EXHIBIT B’ Is the list of the items carted away.

“That no items seized have been returned, and the respondents continue to rely on the unlawful evidence.

“That the applicant suffered violations of his constitutional rights as a result, and this application is brought in good faith to enforce same,” Shaba said.

Source: Naijanews.com