A Federal High Court in Abuja on Thursday, June 19, admitted into evidence a damning Department of State Services (DSS) report alleging that Nnamdi Kanu, leader of the proscribed Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), incited the violence that erupted during the #EndSARS protests, resulting in the deaths of 186 police officers and the destruction of 164 police stations across 17 states.
Justice James Omotoso accepted the documents during the resumed hearing of Kanu’s terrorism trial, following their submission by the fifth prosecution witness (PW5), identified as “Mr EEE,” a DSS operative, for security reasons. The evidence also included death certificates of security agents and an official compliance certificate, despite objections from the defence team.
The witness testified that Kanu’s public broadcasts were laced with inflammatory directives that allegedly provoked coordinated attacks on security agencies nationwide. According to him, his assignment was to compile damage assessments from the #EndSARS protests and trace them to various actors, including the IPOB leader, even though he admitted to never meeting Kanu in person.
Under cross-examination by defence counsel Dr. Onyechi Ikpeazu (SAN), several credibility gaps emerged in the prosecution’s evidence. Mr EEE admitted he could not pinpoint any section in the report that directly linked IPOB members to the violence or that bore Kanu’s name in association with specific killings. “There is no single caption that links deaths directly to IPOB on any page,” he conceded.
Defence lawyers also pointed out that the report lacked signatures, detailed victim information, dated photographs, or forensic confirmation from medical examiners. Ikpeazu argued that such omissions call the authenticity and timing of the report into question, suggesting it may have been assembled after the commencement of the trial for tactical advantage.
Despite the setbacks in the prosecution’s presentation, lead counsel Chief Adegboyega Awomolo (SAN) maintained that enough material evidence had been tendered and urged the court to accept the documents for full consideration. The prosecution insisted that the protests were hijacked by subversive forces using Kanu’s broadcasts as a rallying tool.
Kanu’s defence, led by Kanu Agabi (SAN), has filed a no-case submission, asserting that the charges are politically motivated and lack direct legal substance. Justice Omotoso granted both sides 14 days to file written arguments and an additional two days to respond to legal points. The case is set to define not only Kanu’s fate but also the broader implications of how #EndSARS-related violence is interpreted by Nigeria’s justice system.
