The Federal High Court on April 25, 2017, granted Kanu bail on the treasonable felony charges preferred against him by then-President Muhammadu Buhari’s government.
The detained leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Nnamdi Kanu, has filed an application before the Federal High Court sitting in Abuja demanding the restoration of his revoked bail.
Kanu, who filed the motion on notice through his lead counsel, Aloy Ejimakor, insisted that contrary to the court ruling that led to his bail revocation whereby he was accused of jumping after he fled Nigeria following an invasion of his home in Abia State by security agents, he never jumped bail.
The Federal High Court on April 25, 2017, granted Kanu bail on the treasonable felony charges preferred against him by then-President Muhammadu Buhari’s government.
However, the bail was later revoked by the court and a bench warrant was issued for his arrest on the grounds that he jumped bail, an allegation the IPOB leader denied, stressing that he left Nigeria when security agents invaded his home in Afaraukwu, Abia State.
In the motion of notice marked FHC/ABJ/CR/383/2015, and filed before the Abuja Division of the Federal High Court on March 28, 2024, Kanu’s lawyer asked the court to set aside the bail revocation over misrepresentation.
Ejimakor stated, “On 25 April 2017, the applicant was admitted to bail by this Honourable Court. The Applicant was enjoying his bail when he came under attack by agents of the Complainant at his home at Isiama Afaraukwu Ibeku, Umuahia North LGA, Abia State, whereupon the Applicant fled from Nigeria in what was purely an act of self-preservation.
“The bail of the Applicant was revoked by this Honourable Court and a bench warrant issued against him upon the application of the Complainant made to this Honorable Court that the Applicant had jumped bail.
“The applicant was, pursuant to said bench warrant, subsequently kidnapped in Kenya by agents of the complainant and was brought to Nigeria by way of extraordinary rendition.
“The jurisdiction of this Honourable Court to try the Defendant, as well as issues pertaining to his bail and extraordinary rendition, were challenged up to the Supreme Court in SC/CR/1361/2022: BETWEEN FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF NIGERIA V. NNAMDI KANU, where their Lordships made a determined that the applicant’s bail ought not to have been revoked in the first place, being that it was the invasion of the applicant’s home that caused him to flee in order to secure his life and physical well-being.
“The order setting aside the applicant’s bail, the warrant of arrest and the forfeiture of his bail bond ought to be reversed by virtue of the decision of the Supreme Court.”
Ejimakor went further to plead with the court for an order “setting aside the order revoking the Defendant/Applicant's bail made on the false representation that the Defendant had jumped his bail”.
He also sought an order “setting aside the bench warrant issued against the Defendant/Applicant, on the basis of the misrepresentation that the Defendant had jumped bail and absconded, from his trial.
“An order setting aside the order of forfeiture of the bail bond of the Defendant's sureties, made on the misrepresentation that the Defendant had jumped bail and absconded from his trial.
“An order restoring the Defendant/Applicant's bail on the same terms upon which same was granted by this Honourable court on 25 April, 2017.
“And for such order or further orders as this Honourable Court may deem fit to make in the circumstance of this application.”
“The bail of the applicant ought to be restored in the interest of justice,” he stressed.