The prosecutor in the case of IPOB leader, Nnamdi Kanu, Mr Labaran, made a claim to the press that Nnamdi Kanu denied being an IPOB member. Some people have been running with this story out of sheer ignorance not knowing that the prosecutor is up to mischief

What Mr Labaran is not telling people is that there was no trial per se yesterday, and that Nnamdi Kanu only took a plea to the amended 15 count charges leveled against him. Count 3 says:

That you, Nnamdi Kanu, Male, adult, of Afaraukwu, Ibeku, Umuahia North Local  Government Area, Abia State on diverse dates between 2018 and 2021 within the jurisdiction of this honourable court, professed your self to be a member and leader of the indigenous people of Biafra,  IPOB, a proscribed organisation in Nigeria and that you hereby commited an offence contrary to and  punishable under section 16 of the terrorism prevention ammendment act 2013. 

To this Nnamdi Kanu pleaded "not guilty"

As can be seen from the above, Nnamdi Kanu was not asked if he is an IPOB member, or its leader. A charge was put to him that he professed to being an IPOB member and its leader and this was in contravention of the law

The two questions to now ask is this:

Does one commit a crime by merely saying they belong to IPOB? Does the terrorism prevention act say you commit a crime just for saying you are an IPOB member?

Secondly, is London within the jurisdiction of the federal high court? Thats where Nnamdi Kanu was purported to have said he is the the leader of IPOB, and a member.

The trial will answer these questions

The point being made here is that Nnamdi Kanu was never asked if he is a member or leader of IPOB, so theres nothing to deny or agree to on his part

What is your source or were you at the court premises on Wednesday?
You can only deceive your fellow okoros
" Kanu is a leader of IPOB not member of IPOB"

I must say I am disappointed with the quality of legal counsel for the FG.

That was a totally inappropriate remark and I wonder if it is not contempt of court.
The right place to talk about that is inside the court room and not whipping up sentiments in the press.
Of course I am not a Kanu sympathizer but I want to see the right thing done. I believe( my opinion) that some of his utterances constitute hate speech and are therefore criminal .I also believe he made remarks encouraging criminal violence. That should all be argued in court not on TV
I do not think the prosecution is the best quality

aribisala0:
I must say I am disappointed with the quality of legal counsel for the FG.

That was a totally inappropriate remark and I wonder if it is not contempt of court.
The right place to talk about that is inside the court room and not whipping up sentiments in the press.
Of course I am not a Kanu sympathizer but I want to see the right thing done. I believe( my opinion) that some of his utterances constitute hate speech and are therefore criminal .I also believe he made remarks encouraging criminal violence. That should all be argued in court not on TV
I do not think the prosecution is the best quality

Basically, the prosecutor was questioning Kanu's right to plead not guilty to charge no 3

Asked or no asked, have Igbos ever taken responsibility for their actions before?

What a shameless thing from Kanu to denied Igbos just like Judas even though so many youths of tomorrow's leaders lives from SE have been caught short

beerfraud:
What is your source or were you at the court premises on Wednesday?
You can only deceive your fellow okoros
" Kanu is a leader of IPOB not member of IPOB"

The same person who was telling the press that Kanu denied being an IPOB member actually started by saying that the trial did not start due to an objection by Kanu's Lawyers. Kanu only took plea on the charges brought against him and only count 3 made any reference to being an IPOB member/leader

gidgiddy:


Basically, the prosecutor was questioning Kanu's right to plead not guilty to charge no 3

To what end? What was he going to achieve by so doing?

That should be addressed to the court.

I wonder if you got my point

The prosecutor is free to question whatever he likes , IN COURT
Did Kanu plead not guilty to the media

At any rate he may have been questioning his PLEA and NOT his "right" to plead not guilty there is a big difference. He CANNOT successfully question Kanu's RIGHT to enter whatever plea he chooses to enter

The prosecuting lawyer did the right thing, sometimes it is good to let people know the type of leaders they are following, it is now let for someone that is sensible and responsible to decided to quit or be thrown under the bus, many people will be giving guns by IPOB to kill security operatives like ikonso and eventually will be killed why the leader was in Kenya with small girls having fun but the gullible ones like boko haram suicide bombers are always putting themselves in danger.

aribisala0:
I must say I am disappointed with the quality of legal counsel for the FG.

That was a totally inappropriate remark and I wonder if it is not contempt of court.
The right place to talk about that is inside the court room and not whipping up sentiments in the press.
Of course I am not a Kanu sympathizer but I want to see the right thing done. I believe( my opinion) that some of his utterances constitute hate speech and are therefore criminal .I also believe he made remarks encouraging criminal violence. That should all be argued in court not on TV
I do not think the prosecution is the best quality

gidgiddy:
The prosecutor in the case of IPOB leader, Nnamdi Kanu, Mr Labaran, made a claim to the press that Nnamdi Kanu denied being an IPOB member. Some people have been running with this story out of sheer ignorance not knowing that the prosecutor is up to mischief

What Mr Labaran is not telling people is that there was no trial per se yesterday, and that Nnamdi Kanu only took a plea to the amended 15 count charges leveled against him. Count 3 says:

That you, Nnamdi Kanu, Male, adult, of Afaraukwu, Ibeku, Umuahia North Local  Government Area, Abia State on diverse dates between 2018 and 2021 within the jurisdiction of this honourable court, professed your self to be a member and leader of the indigenous people of Biafra,  IPOB, a proscribed organisation in Nigeria and that you hereby commited an offence contrary to and  punishable under section 16 of the terrorism prevention ammendment act 2013. 

To this Nnamdi Kanu pleaded "not guilty"

As can be seen from the above, Nnamdi Kanu was not asked if he is an IPOB member, or its leader. A charge was put to him that he professed to being an IPOB member and its leader and this was in contravention of the law

The two questions to now ask is this:

Does one commit a crime by merely saying they belong to IPOB? Does the terrorism prevention act say you commit a crime just for saying you are an IPOB member?

Secondly, is London within the jurisdiction of the federal high court? Thats where Nnamdi Kanu was purported to have said he is the the leader of IPOB, and a member.

The trial will answer these questions

The point being made here is that Nnamdi Kanu was never asked if he is a member or leader of IPOB, so theres nothing to deny or agree to on his part

He broadcast in Nigeria which has made it a jurisdiction of the honorable court. He carries out his act in Nigeria and his members are Nigeria. Case of evidence lagos end Sars. It's only a fool who does see kanu going away for a long time.. Even his lawyers know

headSmasher:
The prosecuting lawyer did the right thing, sometimes it is good to let people know the type of leaders they are following, it is now let for someone that is sensible and responsible to decided to quit or be thrown under the bus, many people will be giving guns by IPOB to kill security operatives like ikonso and eventually will be killed why the leader was in Kenya with small girls having fun but the gullible ones like boko haram suicide bombers are always putting themselves in danger.

Your argument is a political not a legal one.
His job is to prosecute not let people know the type of leader anyone is.

What type of leader? Who is the judge of leadership type?
What has telling people about a leader got to do with a trial
.
The accused is innocent until proven guilty. His job is to prove that guilt to the court not TO PEOPLE FOLLOWING LEAADER

That task of letting people know..................... is not his brief.
That is Lai Mohammed's job

pquaver:

He broadcast in Nigeria which has made it a jurisdiction of the honorable court. He carries out his act in Nigeria and his members are Nigeria. Case of evidence lagos end Sars. It's only a fool who does see kanu going away for a long time.. Even his lawyers know

It is not guaranteed. It depends on the quality of the prosecution which at the moment is poor and incompetent in my opinion

The lawyer's comment will have saved these people if they were alive and reasonable, and it will be saving other reasonable IPOB members that are saying either Biafra or death

aribisala0:


Your argument is a political not a legal one.
His job is to prosecute not let people know the type of leader anyone is.

What type of leader? Who is the judge of leadership type?
What has telling people about a leader got to do with a trial
.
The accused is innocent until proven guilty. His job is to prove that guilt to the court not TO PEOPLE FOLLOWING LEAADER

That task of letting people know..................... is not his brief.
That is Lai Mohammed's job

helinues:
Asked or no asked, have Igbos ever taken responsibility for their actions before?

What a shameless thing from Kanu to denied Igbos just like Judas even though so many youths of tomorrow's leaders lives from SE have been caught short

Illiterate ewedu muslim that can't read.

helinues:
Asked or no asked, have Igbos ever taken responsibility for their actions before?

What a shameless thing from Kanu to denied Igbos just like Judas even though so many youths of tomorrow's leaders lives from SE have been caught short

Illiterate ewedu muslim that can't read. Bandwagon buffoon..

aribisala0:
It is not guaranteed. It depends on the quality of the prosecution which at the moment is poor and incompetent in my opinion

But a lawyer who knows his onions will put kanu away for a long time

aribisala0:
I must say I am disappointed with the quality of legal counsel for the FG.

That was a totally inappropriate remark and I wonder if it is not contempt of court.
The right place to talk about that is inside the court room and not whipping up sentiments in the press.
Of course I am not a Kanu sympathizer but I want to see the right thing done. I believe( my opinion) that some of his utterances constitute hate speech and are therefore criminal .I also believe he made remarks encouraging criminal violence. That should all be argued in court not on TV
I do not think the prosecution is the best quality

Good points there. But I beg to disagree with regard to your opinion on what constitutes criminality and hate speech. Kanu encouraged his people to defend themselves against a band of marauding killers who were raping women old and young. Kidnapping for ransom, and mass-murdering his people. The people they are victimizing did nothing to them. No war was declared.

What exactly was he supposed to do or say?. How does the need to save the very life you live constitute criminality and hate?. Assumed infringements must also offset mitigating circumstances. Should we now conclude that a government is right to masquerade under whatever pretense to annihilate those it does not like because they hold executive power?.

We have seen this same script play out elsewhere. Remember the people of Darfur and the Janjaweeed?. Until Miyetti Alla, Gan Alla, and their numerous colorations stand proscribed, and on trial in a properly constituted law court, Onyendu Nnamdi Kanu is an innocent man and should be sent home to his wife and children immediately.

MNK we all know can not deny that he is not IPOB. We know how he dealt with the DSS right in the courtroom, talkless of such easy question.

00FFT00:


Good points there. But I beg to disagree with regard to your opinion on what constitutes criminality and hate speech. Kanu encouraged his people to defend themselves against a band of marauding killers who were raping women old and young. Kidnapping for ransom, and mass-murdering his people. The people they are victimizing did nothing to them. No war was declared.

What exactly was he supposed to do or say?. How does the need to save the very life you live constitute criminality and hate?. Assumed infringements must also offset mitigating circumstances. Should we now conclude that a government is right to masquerade under whatever pretense to annihilate those it does not like because they hold executive power?.

We have seen this same script play out elsewhere. Remember the people of Darfur and the supporter of APC?. Until Miyetti Alla, Gan Alla, and their numerous colorations stand proscribed, and on trial in a properly constituted law court, Onyendu Nnamdi Kanu is an innocent man and should be sent home to his wife and children immediately.

There is no need to disagree wit me because I have not tried to persuade you or anyone. That is just my opinion. I do not think my opinion is that important but that is what I believe and I am not here to argue or debate .You are entitled to your opinion.Kanu should be given a fair trial and hopefully everyone respects the outcome if it does not favour them
Making a speech about his innocence and directing that at me is futile. I am not Binta Nyako

pquaver:


But a lawyer who knows his onions will put kanu away for a long time

Let us wait and see. I don't know book

Tinubu will still not be the president of Nigeria.