Restore My Revoked Bail – Nnamdi Kanu Tells Court

Nnamdi Kanu, the leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), has petitioned the Federal High Court to decide in his favor.

He requested that the court reinstate the bail granted to him earlier. He stated that, contrary to the finding that resulted in his bond revocation, he never skipped bail.

Recall that on April 25, 2017, the Abuja Federal High Court granted the IPOB leader bail, which was later withdrawn, and a bench warrant was issued for his arrest because he jumped bail.

He denied skipping bail, claiming that he fled Nigeria after security forces attacked his hometown of Afaraukwu in Abia State.

Kanu’s primary attorney, Aloy Ejimakor, had filed a petition of notice (FHC/ABJ/CR/383/2015) with the Abuja Federal High Court, requesting that the bail revocation be overturned due to misrepresentation.

The motion on notice states, in part:

“On 25 April 2017, the applicant was admitted to bail by this Honourable Court. The Applicant was enjoying his bail when he came under attack by agents of the Complainant at his home at Isiama Afaraukwu Ibeku, Umuahia North LGA, Abia State, whereupon the Applicant fled from Nigeria in what was purely an act of self-preservation.

“The bail of the Applicant was revoked by this Honourable Court and a bench warrant issued against him upon the application of the Complainant made to this Honorable Court that the Applicant had jumped bail.

“The applicant was, pursuant to said bench warrant, subsequently kidnapped in Kenya by agents of the complainant and was brought to Nigeria by way of extraordinary rendition.

“The jurisdiction of this Honourable Court to try the Defendant, as well as issues pertaining to his bail and extraordinary rendition, were challenged up to the Supreme Court in SC/CR/1361/2022: BETWEEN FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF NIGERIA V. NNAMDI KANU, where their Lordships made a determined that the applicant’s bail ought not to have been revoked in the first place, being that it was the invasion of the applicant’s home that caused him to flee in order to secure his life and physical well-being.

“The order setting aside the applicant’s bail, the warrant of arrest and the forfeiture of his bail bond ought to be reversed by virtue of the decision of the Supreme Court. The bail of the applicant ought to be restored in the interest of justice.”