A Federal Government witness in the ongoing terrorism trial of the Indigenous People of Biafra IPOB leader, Nnamdi Kanu, has told the Federal High Court in Abuja that Kanu admitted to smuggling the Radio Biafra transmitter into Anambra State in 2015.
The witness, an operative of the Department of State Services DSS identified by the codename PWCCC, revealed during Wednesday’s proceedings that Kanu confessed during an interrogation to installing the transmitter at Ubuluisiuzor in Ihiala Local Government Area of Anambra State.
PWCCC further testified that Kanu stated he established Radio Biafra to promote the self-determination agenda of the South East region. Earlier in the trial, the DSS submitted audio recordings from Radio Biafra broadcasts in which Kanu was allegedly heard inciting violence and calling for attacks on prominent Nigerians.
According to the witness, Kanu admitted on November 4, 2015, in an interview with DSS officers, to bringing in the transmitter and overseeing its installation. A video clip of the interview was played in court and admitted into evidence.
Drama unfolded when the prosecution, led by Senior Advocate of Nigeria Adegboyega Awomolo, sought to tender a written statement allegedly made by Kanu. The IPOB leader, through his lead counsel Chief Kanu Agabi SAN, objected, claiming the statement was made under duress and in the absence of his legal representatives.
Kanu alleged that he was subjected to coercion during his transfer from Lagos to Abuja in 2015, stating he was blindfolded, chained, and struck by DSS personnel. He maintained that his detention by the DSS was not sanctioned by any court and that the conditions under which his interviews were conducted were unlawful.
However, the prosecution’s witness, codenamed PWAAA, refuted Kanu’s claims. He asserted that the interrogation sessions were conducted in a peaceful and conducive environment, and dismissed the allegations as “baseless, unfounded and an afterthought.”
In response to the conflicting accounts, Justice James Omotosho ordered a trial within trial to determine the voluntariness of the disputed statement. He directed both parties to file and exchange their written addresses by Thursday, May 29, and scheduled a ruling for the same day by 2:00 p.m., following an adoption of addresses at noon.
The matter was adjourned to May 29 for further proceedings.
