- Uchechi Okwu-Kanu opposes the life imprisonment sentence given to her husband, Nnamdi Kanu.
- The sentence was issued by the Federal High Court in Abuja.
- She claims the trial judge did not adhere to necessary constitutional procedures during the ruling.
Uchechi Okwu-Kanu, wife of Nnamdi Kanu, has expressed strong opposition to the life imprisonment sentence her husband received from the Federal High Court in Abuja.
She alleged that the trial judge failed to follow essential constitutional procedures when delivering the ruling on Thursday.
UCHECHI emphasized that it is mandatory for a judge to read the relevant law pertaining to any terrorism charge before asking the accused to present a defence. She further claimed that the judge appeared to read from a prepared script and had difficulty articulating parts of the judgment.
Her statements came in response to the court’s decision, which sentenced Kanu, leader of the banned Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), to life in prison after he was found guilty on seven counts of terrorism.
Justice James Omotosho issued the sentence after concluding that the prosecution had provided sufficient evidence to substantiate its case. The court noted that Kanu did not present a defence, opting instead to rely on the prosecution’s evidence, leaving the judge with no alternative but to convict.
Reports indicate that the conviction encompassed all seven charges brought by the Department of State Services (DSS).
Reacting, Uchechi said: “In Nigeria, a judge cannot ask a defendant to open a defense on terrorism related charges without reading out the written law under which the court is trying that person.
“Okay, so the constitution of the Federal Republic of of Nigeria, 1999 as amended, section 36, I mean, I’m sure that is very familiar to everyone now.
“It provides that a person shall not be convicted of a criminal offense unless the the offense is defined and the penalty prescribed as in a written law. So what Omotosho has done today is a script, a written script for him to read out.
“Everyone could hear him. Everyone could see that he was reading a script handed over to him and that he could barely read out some of the words in his own very written judgment. How interesting. How interesting.
“I’ve had to quickly tweet and well post the the travesty of justice today regarding how Omotosho ignored the Constitution’s requirement that none can be convicted under an unwritten or unknown offense.
“He forced Mazi Nnamdi Kanu to take a plea under a repealed law, which Mazi Nnamdi Kanu refused. So show me where it is written before I can enter into a defense. And that never happened.
“Omotosho refused, blatantly, flagrantly, to issue written rulings on serious applications. So you could hear him reading. You could hear him counting 1000s of lines of hours of account.
“But then he refused to issue a written a written ruling, which he ought to have done first, but never did. He told Mazi Nnamdi Kanu to put all objections in a final address, then block the final address. So if you were Mazi Nnamdi Kanu, you will be as outraged as he was this afternoon.
“You cannot ask me to put my final address, put it down, write it down, and then you block it. So Mazi Nnamdi Kanu has right.
“It is his right to put a final address down, to write it down. But a Omotosho blocked that and decided to read out those nonsense he called counts.”
