The Court of Appeal in Abuja on Monday reserved judgment in an application by the Federal Government seeking a stay of execution of the court’s judgment that ordered the release of the leader of the proscribed Indigenous People of Biafra, Nnamdi Kanu.
Justice Haruna Tsanami, who presided over the hearing of the application, announced that a date for delivery of judgment would be communicated to the parties when ready.
The Federal Government while arguing the application told the Court of Appeal that Kanu constituted a huge threat to national security and must be kept in detention to have relative peace.
The government also said that Kanu was a flight risk and would escape out of the country if the judgment which ordered his release was not stayed.
In a motion for stay of execution of the October 13 judgment delivered in favour of Kanu, the FG insisted that the Biafra nation agitator would throw the nation’s security into jeopardy and prejudice to the public and private economic activities.
The FG’s counsel, David Kaswe, while arguing the motion informed the appellate court that Kanu had earlier demonstrated to be flight risk when he jumped out of the country when granted bail in the terrorism charges against him at the Federal High Court in Abuja.
Kaswe insisted that it was in the interest of justice and the need to have relative peace in the South-East and the whole Nigeria that Kanu be made to remain in detention pending the resolution of an appeal already filed at the Supreme Court.
“My Lords, our concerns, the concern of the Federal Government is the threat the release of Kanu poses to the security of this country and its political, social and economic activities. We will not be able to lay hands upon him if he is allowed out of detention and finds his way out of the country”, Kaswe said.
He therefore prayed the court to stay the execution of the court judgment to enable Kanu remain in custody pending when Supreme Court would finally determine the pending appeal.
However, lead counsel to Kanu, Chief Mike Ozekhome (SAN), dismissed the claim that Kanu jumped bail in his trial at the Federal High Court.
Ozekhome claimed that the Military unjustly invaded Kanu’s ancestral home and that it took God’s grace for his client to escape death.
He informed the court that the Federal Government was in contempt of court by not obeying the October 13 judgment and as such, had no moral and legal rights to make the request from the same court.
Contrary to the FG’s claim, Ozekhome said that it was only the release of his client that would ensure peace and tranquility not only in the South-East but the entire country.
“My Lord, the action of the FG in respect of Nnamdi Kanu is an insult, a slap in the face to this court. It is also an invitation to anarchy and I humbly urge this court to dismiss the application for lacking in merit,” he said.
Justice Tsanami, after taking arguments from parties, announced that judgment had been reserved and that lawyers would be communicated when it was ready.
However,the Federal Government, on Monday, gave reasons why it has not complied with the Court of Appeal judgement that ordered it to release the detained leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra, IPOB, Nnamdi Kanu.
The federal government, in an affidavit filed in support of its application to stay the execution of the judgement, described Kanu as “a flight risk person”, insisting that the case against him borders on national security.
Relying on the decided case law in Federal Republic of Nigeria Vs Asari Dokubo, FG, argued that once a case touched on national security, the right of the individual affected takes secondary place.
“The Respondent is a flight risk person. It is important to appreciate the gamut of depositions in our application.
“One of the ground of our application is that this matter touches on national security of the state.
“We rely on the case of FRN Vs Dokubo, where the Supreme Court held that where national security is threatened or likelihood of it being threatened, human rights take secondary place.
“Once there is a threat to national security, human rights of any individual can be suspended until such threat is taken care of.
“Once security of the nation is in jeopardy, the individual right may not even exist”, FG argued through its lawyer, Mr. David Kaswe, an Assistant State Counsel in the office of the Attorney-General of the Federation.
It further told the court that there is intelligence report that releasing Kanu from detention would worsen the security situation in the South East region.
However, Kanu’s lawyer, Chief Mike Ozekhome, SAN, urged the appellate court to dismiss FG’s application, insisting that it was tantamount to seeking the stay of the liberty of a citizen.
“In fact, my lords, on the contrary, the release of Kanu will actually bring peace and tranquility to the South East in particular and the nation in general
“This was demonstrated after the judgement of this court that ordered the release of the Respondent. Immediately the judgement was delivered, there was so much joy and happiness in the entire South East. There was so much jubilation and merriment”, Ozekhome added.
He argued that Dokubo’s case was different from that of Kanu.
According him, while Dokubo applied to be granted bail, pending the determination of the charge against him, in Kanu’s case, the appellate court has already terminated his trial and ordered his release.
After it had listened to both sides, a three-man panel of Justices of the appellate court led by Justice Haruna Tsanami, reserved ruling till a date to be communicated to the parties.
