A witness from the Department of State Services (DSS), identified as BBB, has told the Federal High Court in Abuja that the agency was not involved in the arrest of Nnamdi Kanu in Kenya.
BBB, the second prosecution witness in the ongoing trial of the IPOB leader, made this disclosure during cross-examination by Kanu’s lawyer, Paul Erokoro (SAN), before Justice James Omotosho.
He clarified that the DSS does not carry out foreign operations, as its duties are strictly within Nigeria. “DSS did not kidnap Kanu in Kenya. We are confined to Nigeria,” he said.
The witness acknowledged Kanu’s role in founding Radio Biafra but stated he had no knowledge of whether it was still broadcasting. He also stressed the neutrality of the DSS, stating that its operatives are guided by a professional code of conduct and are not influenced by political figures.
On legal oversight, BBB stated that the DSS does not report to the Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF) but can receive communications from any agency, including the AGF, for follow-up investigations.
Erokoro pressed further, referencing Kanu’s claims of being kidnapped in Kenya, but BBB maintained he had no involvement or knowledge of the foreign arrest.
He also denied awareness of any law in Nigeria permitting self-defence through violence, responding to claims that Kanu encouraged followers to retaliate if attacked by security forces.
Erokoro presented three court judgments that ruled in Kanu’s favour, questioning the legality of his arrest and detention. Justice Omotosho admitted the documents into evidence.
The DSS witness noted that the agency only participated in Kanu’s arrest within Nigeria, particularly in Lagos. He alleged that Kanu incited violence against security agents through his broadcasts.
The session also touched on concerns raised over social media misrepresentation of court proceedings. Justice Omotosho warned legal practitioners against unprofessional conduct, suggesting such actions could lead to disbarment.
Due to a request by the defence to play video evidence, the judge granted a final adjournment of the cross-examination to May 22, cautioning that further delays would close the opportunity to question the witness.
As the case continues, tensions remain high, with both legal teams urging caution over how proceedings are portrayed in public.
