The Principal Witness (PW1) in the trial of the leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Nnamdi Kanu, has told the court that he did not find any instrument of terrorism on the defendant.
Answering questions from a former Attorney General of the Federation, Kanu Agabi, who led the defence team in a cross examination in the resumed hearing this Friday before Justice James Omotosho of the Federal High Court, Abuja, an operative of the Department of State Services, known simply as AAA, who appeared as PW1
The court had granted the request of the Federal Government for witnesses to testify behind the screens.
While the prosecution counsel is Adegboyega Awomolo (SAN), a former Attorney General of the Federation, Kanu Agabi, led the defence team.
An operative of the Department of State Services, known simply as AAA, appeared as PW1 also said the items presented in court, from Nenadi Kanu said they were not offensive.
Reports also say when AAA was asked if he was the officer conducting the interview in the video played in court, he said that five officers were in the room, and he was one of them.
He stated that his role in the investigation was limited to arresting the defendant, obtaining his statement, and escorting him to Abuja for onward investigation.
When asked if he had analysed any of the items recovered from him, he said he analysed only his phone.
He said the phone was in evidence, though there was no analysis in evidence because they considered it immaterial to the case.
When further asked, “Do you agree that in the 10 years since you confiscated these items, many of them have lost their use?” AAA said, “Yes”.
AAA was asked whether there is a record of the items he claimed the DSS returned to the defendant. He said yes, but noted that he didn’t personally keep the records.
Speaking further, PW1 also revealed that he did not find any instrument of violence on the lady with Kanu and did not consider her company as facilitating terrorism.
When Agabi asked the DSS witness whether he found “any instrument of terrorism on the defendant,” he said, “No.”
When asked whether the defendant was charged with damaging anybody’s property, AAA answered, “Maybe not personally and virtually”.
While pointing out that there were social media messages where the defendant was inciting violence, he however said he did not know one person who carried out any act of violence because the defendant incited him but further noted that the defendant called Nigeria a zoo.
When asked whether he remembered that the defendant said IPOB was not an armed group and does not give armed training to its members, he said he remembered the defendant saying IPOB does not bear arms.
