A witness and an operative of the Department of State Services (DSS), identified as BBB, told the Federal High Court in Abuja on Wednesday that the DSS was not part of the arrest of Nnamdi Kanu in Kenya.
BBB, who is the second prosecution witness in the ongoing trial of Kanu, appeared before Justice James Omotosho. During cross-examination by Kanu’s lawyer, Paul Erokoro (SAN), the witness said the DSS only handles matters within Nigeria and does not carry out operations outside the country.
“DSS did not kidnap Kanu in Kenya. We are confined to Nigeria. We did not arrest Kanu in Kenya,” he said.
BBB told the court that Kanu confirmed to the DSS that he founded Radio Biafra but claimed he was unaware of whether the station was still active. He also explained that the DSS does not act under political pressure and is overseen by the National Security Adviser, not by the Attorney General of the Federation (AGF).
The witness said the DSS could receive letters from other agencies, including the AGF’s office, but insisted that their operations are guided by the service’s code of conduct and training, which demand neutrality and objectivity.
When asked whether he was present during Kanu’s arrest in Kenya, BBB said he was not. He also denied any knowledge of the DSS being involved in that operation. He explained that it wasn’t his duty to verify claims that Kanu was kidnapped abroad.
Regarding historical context, the witness acknowledged Nigeria’s colonial history but said he had not read of freedom fighters being called terrorists. On Odumegwu Ojukwu, he noted Ojukwu was a former Nigerian army officer who later led a war against the state.
BBB stated that while peaceful agitation for change isn’t illegal, he accused Kanu of inciting violence and killings through Radio Biafra broadcasts. He said Kanu urged his followers to attack security forces. When asked whether this could be seen as self-defense, BBB disagreed, saying, “I am not aware of any Nigerian law that allows anyone to kill another person.”
He also noted he wasn’t aware that Kanu had asked a separatist agitator, Simon Ekpa, to halt his activities.
Erokoro presented three court judgments that ruled Kanu’s arrest and detention unlawful. These were accepted into evidence. The judgments, from courts in Umuahia and Enugu between 2022 and 2023, criticized the government’s actions, including the invasion of Kanu’s home in Abia State.
BBB clarified that the DSS only arrested Kanu in Lagos and reiterated his belief that the defendant had called for attacks on security personnel.
The defense counsel later requested an adjournment, stating that they planned to present video evidence not currently available. Prosecuting lawyer, Adegboyega Awomolo (SAN), objected, pointing out that the court had already set time aside for the defense to conclude cross-examination.
Justice Omotosho granted the adjournment but warned that if the defense did not conclude cross-examination on May 22, the court would consider it closed.
Earlier in the proceedings, both lead counsels raised concerns about a member of Kanu’s legal team allegedly misrepresenting court events on social media. Justice Omotosho cautioned against such behavior, warning it could delay proceedings and amount to misconduct.
He said, “Most of these things are gross misconduct on which you could be disbarred. It is a misconduct. I don’t want to mention any name. The person knows himself. Let us act well.”
