Alex Enumah in Abuja  

The Federal High Court in Abuja on Wednesday, admitted as evidence the medical report and death certificate of a former presidential adviser, Ahmed Gulak, as evidence in the trial of pro-Biafra agitator, Nnamdi Kanu.

Gulak was killed in Imo State in 2021 by persons said to be supporters of the now proscribed Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), according to the Federal Government.

At the resumed trial of Kanu at the Federal High Court, the prosecution, which had earlier accused the pro-Biafra leader of being responsible for the death of the former presidential aide, as well as several others, tendered before Justice James Omotosho the two documents to establish their claims.

The documents tendered by the prosecution through its witness identified as PWBBB, were subsequently admitted as exhibits, since Kanu’s defence team led by Chief Kanu Agabi (SAN) did not object to their admittance.

At Wednesday’s proceedings, the prosecution’s lead counsel, Chief Adegboyega Awomolo (SAN), through his witness, tendered documents, which included a police report from Owerri, Imo State, linking Gulak’s death to gunmen suspected to be members of IPOB.

Kanu is standing trial on a seven-count criminal charge bordering on terrorism and treasonable felony.

In proving its case against the defendant, the Federal Government has so far called two witnesses and tendered several documents including statements, letters, video and audio recordings of Kanu ordering the killings of security personnel and some other persons.

Meanwhile, Kanu’s lead counsel challenged the credibility and completeness of the video statement obtained from Kanu while in the DSS custody. 

Agabi queried why only Kanu and his team were visible in the footage, to which the witness explained as the usual procedure.

Asking further questions on the video statement, the witness said he could not recall whether he wore a mask during the interview.

Agabi raised concerns over Kanu’s prolonged detention and alleged solitary confinement, but the witness, however, maintained that he was merely an investigator and not responsible for Kanu’s custody or welfare, saying: “Solitary confinement is not a practice of the DSS. I am not his handler.”

The defence further questioned the legality of the prolonged detention, claiming it constituted cruel and inhuman treatment, but the witness insisted he was unaware of Kanu’s psychological state and said it was not part of his investigative duty.

Under further scrutiny, the witness admitted he was not involved in drafting the charges and could not confirm the dates of various charge amendments against the defendant.

Agabi asserted that the charges were speculative, to which the witness reiterated his limited role as an investigator.

In a dramatic turn, the court was told that despite multiple amendments to the charge sheet over several years, the investigating officer had not confronted Kanu with his accusers. 

The witness admitted he only presented a letter from the Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF) but did not facilitate any face-to-face encounter.

Tensions rose when Agabi argued that the AGF had directed an investigation long after charges had been filed and the witness replied he was unaware of when the charges were filed and insisted he acted only on the directive minuted to him.

On requests for critical documents, Agabi informed the court that the defence had applied for certain police records but had yet to receive them. 

While Awomolo opposed an adjournment, citing a prior court order for accelerated hearing, Justice Omotoso granted a short adjournment.

“The matter has international and domestic interest,” the judge noted, warning against unnecessary delays. “I am inclined to grant the adjournment today to ensure the defence is properly heard. Please use the opportunity well; we are here for justice.”

Before adjourning, Justice Omotoso sought clarification over claims that Kanu’s lawyers were denied access to him by the Department of State Services (DSS). 

While Agabi denied being denied access to Kanu, the court expressed concern over a conflicting social media post by one of Kanu’s lawyers, Aloy Ejimakor.

The judge cautioned Ejimakor against unprofessional conduct and urged all counsel to verify information before publishing, particularly on social media.

Meanwhile, the court has adjourned trial to 21 May at the instance of the defence counsel.