The
decision of the Federal High Court to deny a bail application by the
leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra, Nnamdi Kanu, has been
affirmed by the Court of Appeal in Abuja.
Kanu is facing treason charges, alongside two others, Benjamin Madubgwu and James Nwawuisi, at the Federal High Court Abuja.
The outspoken Indegenoius People of Biafra (IPOB) leader, had on May 5 approached the appeal court through his counsel, Chucks Muoma, challenging the decision of the Federal High Court to deny him bail.
Muoma had asked the court to determine whether the ruling by Justice John Tsoho of the Federal High Court was not an aberration of Kanu’s fundamental rights as stipulated in the Constitution.
He also prayed the Appeal Court to determine whether or not Tsoho was right in making Kanu’s dual citizenship an excuse for refusing him bail. According to Muoma, the ruling was granted as though it was the first appellant alone that made the application for bail.
A three member-panel, led by Justice Abdul Aboki, in its ruling, held that the lower court was right in relying upon Kanu’s dual citizenship, as a basis for denying his application for bail, adding that the chances of Kanu returning to his other country was high, and that the laws of his other country may prevent the trial from reaching its logical end.
The court also ruled that the charge against Kanu and the other defendants was grievous and involved a threat to the state, therefore an application for bail would not be entertained.
Aboki also stated that the Federal High Court acted within its jurisdiction in the said ruling, and hence affirmed the ruling of the court.
Nnamdi Kanu during a court appearance
The Court of Appeal in Abuja has affirmed the decision of the Federal
High Court to deny a bail application by the director of the well
publicized Radio Biafra, Nnamdi Kanu.Kanu is facing treason charges, alongside two others, Benjamin Madubgwu and James Nwawuisi, at the Federal High Court Abuja.
The outspoken Indegenoius People of Biafra (IPOB) leader, had on May 5 approached the appeal court through his counsel, Chucks Muoma, challenging the decision of the Federal High Court to deny him bail.
Muoma had asked the court to determine whether the ruling by Justice John Tsoho of the Federal High Court was not an aberration of Kanu’s fundamental rights as stipulated in the Constitution.
He also prayed the Appeal Court to determine whether or not Tsoho was right in making Kanu’s dual citizenship an excuse for refusing him bail. According to Muoma, the ruling was granted as though it was the first appellant alone that made the application for bail.
A three member-panel, led by Justice Abdul Aboki, in its ruling, held that the lower court was right in relying upon Kanu’s dual citizenship, as a basis for denying his application for bail, adding that the chances of Kanu returning to his other country was high, and that the laws of his other country may prevent the trial from reaching its logical end.
The court also ruled that the charge against Kanu and the other defendants was grievous and involved a threat to the state, therefore an application for bail would not be entertained.
Aboki also stated that the Federal High Court acted within its jurisdiction in the said ruling, and hence affirmed the ruling of the court.
">
">
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
DON'T JUST READ DROP YOUR COMMENT.
Kindly help Share this information with all your friends and family on Facebook or Twitter, they will appreciate it. Click on any of the Share buttons Below to share now Thanks