The Federal Government yesterday closed its case against leader of the proscribed Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Nnamdi Kanu, in the ongoing trial on allegations bordering on terrorism and treason before a Federal High Court in Abuja.

Prosecution Counsel, Chief Adegboyega Awomolo (SAN), announced this after the 5th prosecution witness (PW-5), identified as EEE for security reasons, was led in evidence and cross-examined by Kanu’s counsel, Onyechi Ikpeazu (SAN), before Justice James Omotosho.

Awomolo told the court that after calling five witnesses in the trial, the prosecution was satisfied that from the avalanche of evidence tendered, including the broadcast of activities of the leader of the IPOB, the government had sufficiently satisfied the need to close its case. “I therefore close the case,” Awomolo said.

After the announcement, the lead defence counsel, Chief Kanu Agabi (SAN) informed the court that they would be opting for a no-case submission, which would be filed in due course.

A no-case submission is made when a defendant is convinced that the totality of evidence that was adduced by the prosecution, failed to establish a prima-facie case that is capable of warranting the court to compel him to enter his defence to the charge.

If the application succeeds, the defendant would be discharged by the court, thus marking an end to the trial. In view of Kanu’s decision, trial judge, Justice James Omotosho gave his legal team and that of FG, 14 days each to file written addresses and two days to file their reply on points of law.

The case was subsequently adjourned till July 18 for adoption of the no-case-submission. Earlier in the proceeding, FG, through the PW-5, tendered in evidence, a report it said linked the embattled IPOB leader to the killing of 186 police officers as well as destruction of 164 police stations during the EndSARS protests that took place in 2020.

The witness, who is an operative of the Department of State Services (DSS) told the court that he was part of a team that was deployed to gather intelligence and compile reports on the impact of violence that trailed the protest. He told the court that he got to know Nnamdi Kanu through the media though they never met in person.

He told the court that his mandate was to record all the destructions of public properties and deaths of security operatives that occurred as a result of Kanu’s radio broadcasts.

Among items he tendered, which were admitted in evidence by the court, included a damage assessment report, death certificates of some security officers, as well as a certificate of compliance. Kanu’s counsel challenged the admissibility of the exhibits, saying he would adduce his reason in the defendant’s final written address.