The leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra, IPOB, Leader Nnamdi Kanu, has been granted bail.
The bail is the first since the commencement of his trial for alleged treason.
Mr. Kanu and three others are facing trial on allegations of treason among others.
The presiding judge, Binta Nyako, gave the order to allow Mr. Kanu attend to his ailing health condition.
According to the order, Mr. Kanu is to produce three sureties with N100 million each.
He is also expected to not be among a crowd.
The judge said Mr. Kanu must never be seen in a crowd of more than 10 people.
“No interviews and no rallies,” said Mrs. Nyako.
The Ekiti State Governor, Ayodele Fayose, was among those who attended Tuesday’s sitting.
The conditions given to People of Biafra are:
- Mr. Kanu must not hold rallies.
- He must not grant interviews
- Kanu must not be in a crowd of more than 10 people.
- He must provide three sureties in the sum of N100 million each.
- One of the sureties must be a senior highly placed person of Igbo extraction such as a senator.
- Second surety must be a highly respected Jewish leader since Mr. Kanu said his religion is Judaism
- The third surety must be a highly respected person who owns landed property and is resident in Abuja
- The IPOB leader must deposit his Nigerian passport
- He must also deposit his British passport with the court
- He must provide the court with reports on the progress of his health and treatment on a monthly basis.
- The order for him to deposit his Nigerian and British passports also mean he cannot travel out of the country (If this is considered, it is the thirteenth condition).
Justice Nyako however refused bail to the three other defendants standing trial with Kanu, namely Chidiebere Onwudiwe, Benjamin Madubugwu and David Nwawuisi.
The judge maintained that the only reason she admitted Mr. Kanu to bail was because of his ill health.
Although the charge of terrorism had been struck out against the defendants, the charge of treasonable felony hanging over them was a very serious offence.
She also refused a second application by the three defendants seeking a review of her earlier ruling that witnesses who were security personnel should be protected.
She said although the defendants had made the application for variation of the ruling based on the grounds that the charge of terrorism had been dropped, the charge of treasonable felony was equally a grave one.
Based on this, she said she would stick to her earlier ruling that as long as the witnesses were security personnel, they would testify behind a curtain or wear a mask.
She adjourned the matter till July 11 and 12, for definite commencement of trial.