Why Justice Binta Nyako can no longer try Nnamdi Kanu — Lawyer
Umuahia — Chief Aloy Ejimakor, counsel to the detained leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Mazi Nnamdi Kanu, has outlined reasons why Justice Binta Nyako of the Abuja Federal High Court has lost the jurisdiction to preside over his client’s trial.
Ejimakor emphasized that Justice Nyako had previously recused herself from the case through a court order, making any further proceedings before her a constitutional violation.
In a strongly worded statement on Monday, Ejimakor described Kanu’s re-arraignment before Justice Nyako as unlawful, asserting that the decision to adjourn the case sine die (indefinitely) was also null and void.
According to Ejimakor, “The judge’s recusal order issued on September 24, 2024, remains valid and was never appealed. Therefore, Justice Nyako no longer possesses the requisite jurisdiction to handle the case.”
He further argued that the Federal Government’s failure to release Kanu from detention despite lacking legal grounds to continue prosecuting him was a breach of justice.
Ejimakor highlighted several legal precedents to support his position, emphasizing that Justice Nyako had become functus officio, meaning she had completed her role in the matter and could not revisit or reopen it.
The lawyer also pointed out instances of alleged judicial misconduct during Kanu’s trial, including his detention in a DSS facility instead of a regular prison and the refusal to reinstate his bail despite a Supreme Court ruling.
Ejimakor revealed that Kanu had filed a judicial misconduct complaint against Justice Nyako, arguing that it was inappropriate for the judge to continue presiding over the case while the complaint remained unresolved.
He further recommended transferring the case to a Federal High Court in the Southeast, where the alleged offenses had occurred, as a lawful and logical solution.
Ejimakor concluded by urging the Federal Government to release Kanu if it could not conduct his trial within a reasonable timeframe, stressing the constitutional mandate for timely trials and the need for a fair judicial process.
