News Investigators/ The Federal High Court in Abuja on Thursday, admitted in evidence videos of Gen. Theophilus Danjuma (rtd.), Gov. Hope Uzodinma of Imo and the Director General of Department of State Services (DSS), Adeola Ajayi, in Nnamdi Kanu’s defence.
Justice James Omotosho admitted the flash drive containing the three separate video recordings as Exhibit PW-P and a certificate of compliance as Exhibit PWP-1 in the ongoing terrorism trial of Kanu, the leader of the proscribed Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB).
The documents were admitted in evidence after Paul Erokoro, SAN, counsel for Kanu, tendered them from the bar and were not opposed by the Federal Government’s lawyer, Adegboyega Awomolo, SAN.
The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that the three video recordings were played in the open court and the FG’s witness, an operative of the DSS, identified as BBB, was crossed examined by Erokoro.
Earlier, the lawyer reminded the witness that during the cross examination the previous day, reference was made to remarks by Danjuma and the DSS DG and he responded in affirmative.
“Do you know your DG and if you see him, will you recognised him,” Erokoro asked.
“Yes, I will my lord,” BBB responded, and the lawyer sought the leave of the court for the video to be played.
In one of the videos, the DSS DG was addressing a gathering of people where he suggested that communities should endeavour to create a first line of defence against bandits and other invaders.
In the video, Ajayi cited examples of two communities; Azare and Tafawa Balewa in Bauchi State, that were able to kill and dislodge Boko Haram insurgents through collective effort when he was serving as state director.
He, however, said that such effort must be done under the guidance and approval of the security agencies.
The DG said it was practically impossible for security agencies to protect every society in the country.
The DSS boss was heard saying: “The practical approach to mobilising people is to get everyone involved. It is impossible for the security agencies to deploy to every part of the country.
“What we need to do is to make communities set up first line of defence.
“We have to allow some levels of armament for the communities to rise and defend themselves first, but under the guidance and approval of security agencies. The time to start it is now.”
When asked by Erokoro whether the DG DSS was not asking for communities to defend themselves, the witness emphasised that the DG stressed that such communities must come for guidance and approval from security agencies.
In another video, former Defence Minister, Gen. Danjuma, was shown making a remark in an event.
Danjuma was heard, in the video, saying members of the armed forces were not neutral in the ongoing killings across the country.
The ex-General said in the video: “the peace in this state is under threat. There is an attempt for ethnic cleansing in this state and all the riverine states of Nigeria. We must resist it. We must rise up.
“The armed forces are not neutral. They collude with armed bandits that killed Nigerians, they facilitate their movement. They cover them.
“If you are depending on the armed forces to protect you, you will all die one by one.”
When asked by Erokoro who the speaker in the video was, the witness confirmed that he was Danjuma.
Erokoro then asked the witness if he heard Danjuma calling on people to defend themselves and that the security agencies were not neutral and BBB responded in affirmative.
BBB, however, rejected Erokoro’s request to give his (BBB’s) opinion on the implication of what Danjuma said.
“I am not here to interpret his statement. The maker of the video should be the one to interpret it himself,” he said.
When the lawyer asked him if he was aware DSS arrested Danjuma for making the statement, the witness said: “I am not aware my organised arrested him.”
The third video showed Gov. Uzodinma complaining about the killings of some All Progressives Congress (APC)’s leaders in his state and blamed it on the politicians.
The governor said in the video: “Wicked politicians are sponsoring the killings in Orlu. The APC leaders were killed but not one PDP leader has been killed or attacked for once.
“I think there cup is now full and killings of innocent people must stop in Imo.”
Uzodinma, who said it occured to him that the alleged killers were after APC members, said government would come hard on them if they failed to refrain from such act.
When asked who the speaker was, the witness said it was Gov. Uzodinma.
Erokoro then asked BBB whether Uzodinma’s position did not contradict his claim in court that IPOB members were behind killings in Orlu in Imo.
Responding, the witness said DSS’ position was informed by the outcome of their investigation.
BBB further said that, while Uzodinma failed to mention names of victims of the killings he referred to, the DSS’ investigation was specific on the identity of those killed by suspected IPOB members, who were enforcing the sit-at-home order directed by Kanu.
“Our investigation revealed those who were killed by suspected IPOB members and we mentioned their names, but the governor did not mention any name of people he said were killed,” the witness said.
BBB, who was the 2nd prosecution witness (PW-2), was also cross examined by Ekororo based on his earlier testimony.
When asked about the IPOB status, the witness said he was aware that IPOB had been proscribed by an order of court and that Kanu had been a member of IPOB before and after its proscription.
On whether he knew what the EndSARS protest was about, the witness said it was about the call by some people for the police’s Special Anti Robbery Squad (SARS) to be scrapped.
The witness also said he was aware that some states, including Lagos and the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) constituted commissions of enquiry to probe the EndSARS protest and other related incidents.
When he was asked to read the heading of the report of the panel, the witness said: “Lagos State Panel of Judicial Enguriy on Restitution of Victims of EndSARS Protest and Other Matters.”
The witness agreed with Erokoro that the report from the commission set up by Lagos State did not indicate IPOB and that it did not classify the protest as act of terrorism.
Erokoro tendered the report issued by the Lagos’s commission of enquiry, which the court admitted in evidence as Exhibit PWO after it was not opposed by FG’s lawyer, Chief Adegboyega Awomolo.
When he was asked if Kanu’s international passport had ever been in DSS custody, the witness said he had never seen the passport before.
When asked if he was aware Kanu had travelled to different countries before, BBB said the IPOB leader told him he had travelled to many countries.
He said though he did not know if the name, “Biafra,” had been proscribed, BBB said he was aware that IPOB had been proscribed.
The witness, who admitted that the AGF letter was tendered through him in court, said he was aware of all the allegations against Kanu mentioned by the AGF in the letter.
The witness disagreed with Erokoro that the letter did not serve any useful purpose.
He said he did not know if Kanu had been in detention for the past five years.
When asked if he had the report of the investigation on Kanu, BBB responded in affirmative.
He, however, said that the report was not with him in court because the report belongs to the government.
The witness said his involvement in Kanu’s matter was only the taking of his statement on the video.
When asked if there were any other persons as defendants in the charge against Kanu, BBB said it was only Kanu he saw as sole defendant.
Erokoro put the question to BBB that in the earlier video he watched, there was no one bearing arms as members of ESN.
Responding, the witness said: “In the video we watched, I cannot say they carry arms or they did not carry arms.”
The witness further explained that the people might be carrying arms underneath them.
While responding to question during re-examination by FG’s lawyer, Chief Adegboyega Awomolo, SAN, on whether the Eastern Security Network (ESN) set up by Kanu and Amatekun established by south west states had the same features in their formation, the witness said ESN was an illegal group unlike the Amotekun.
The witness said Amotekun was backed by laws, passed by the various houses of assembly of the six south west states while ESN had no law supporting its existence.
“ESN and Amotekun are not the same. I know that states in the South West passed laws to legalise Amotekun. But, ESN is not registered.
“ESN is illegal. Amotekun is recognised by law,” the witness said.
Justice Omotosho, then discharged BBB from the witness box.
The judge, before adjourning for the day, gave the prosecution six days within which to call all its witnesses and conclude its case.
He said this would, however, depend on how fast the defence too conduct their cross examination.
Justice Omotosho also indicated that the defence would be allocated nine days
He reminded parties that accelerated hearing had been granted in the case so that the trial could be concluded within reasonable time in the interest of justice.
The judge, following an agreement by lawyers to parties, adjourned until May 28 and May 29, June 6, June 16, June 18 and June 19 for the prosecution to conduct its case.
NAN
