Falana Asks Court To Quash Charges Against Sheikh Zakzaky Over Kaduna State’s Failure To Prove Case

The legal team of Sheikh Ibraheem Zakzaky, leader of the Islamic Movement in Nigeria, has filed a motion asking the High Court in Kaduna to quash all charges against him.

Sheikh Zakzaky and his wife, Zeenat, have been detained by the Nigerian Government since 2015 after hundreds of his followers were killed by the Nigerian Army in Zaria, Kaduna State.

In the motion filed by rights lawyer, Femi Falana (SAN), on behalf of Sheikh Zakzaky, deposed to by Muhammad Ibrahim Zakzaky, son of the detained IMN leader, and served on the Director of Public Prosecutions, Ministry of Justice of Kaduna, he asked the court to dismiss the case after the state’s failure to disclose the offences preferred against his client.

The motion reads, “An order of this honourable court quashing count one of the charge in its entirety for not disclosing an offence known to law contrary to Sections 36 (8) and (12) of the 1999 constitution as amended, or in the alternative, an order of this honourable court quashing count one of the charge in its entirety for being an abuse of court process and/ or devoid of proof of evidence, evincing a prima facie case or a disclosure of the offences and/ or for failure to link the defendants to the offences purportedly charged from the statements of the witnesses and/ or the statements of the defendants as well as the documents attached to the purported charge.

“An order of this honourable court quashing count two of the charge in its entirety for being an abuse of court process and devoid of proof of evidence or a disclosure of the offences and/ or for failure to link the defendants to the offences purportedly charged from the statements of the witnesses (and/ or the statements of the defendants) as well as the documents attached to the charge.

“An order of this honourable court quashing count three of the charge in its entirety for being an abuse of court process and devoid of proof of evidence or a disclosure of the offences and/or for failure to link the defendants to the offences purportedly charged from the statements of the witnesses and/ or the statements of the defendants as well as the documents attached to the purported charge.

“An order of this honourable court quashing count four of the charge in its entirety for being an abuse of court process and devoid of proof of evidence or a disclosure of the offence charged and/or for failure to link the defendants to the offences purportedly charged from the statements of the witnesses and/or the statements of the defendants as well as the documents attached to the purported charge.

“An order of this honourable court quashing count five of the charge in its entirety being an abuse of court process and devoid of proof of evidence or a disclosure of the offences charged and/or for failure to link the defendants to the offence(s) purportedly charged from the statements of the witnesses and the statements and/ or the statements of the defendants as well as the documents attached to the charge.

“An order of this honourable court quashing count six of the charge in its entirety for not disclosing an offence known to law contrary to sections 36 (8) and (12) of the 1999 constitution as amended, or in the alternative, an order of this honourable court quashing count six of the charge in its entirety for being an abuse of court process and/ or devoid of proof of evidence, evincing a prima facie case or a disclosure of the offences and/or for failure to link the defendants to the offences purportedly charged from the statements of the witnesses and/ or the statements of the defendants as well as the documents attached to the purported charge.

“An order of this honourable court quashing count seven of the charge in its entirety for being an abuse of court process and devoid of proof of evidence or a disclosure of the offences and/or for failure to link the defendants to the offences purportedly charged from the statements of the witnesses and/ or the statements of the defendants as well as the documents attached to the purported charge.

“An order of this honourable court quashing count eight of the charge in its entirety for being an abuse of court process and devoid of proof of evidence disclosing a prima facie case or a disclosure of the offences and/ or for failure to link the defendants to the offences purportedly charged from the statements of the witnesses and/or the statements of the defendants as well as the documents attached to the purported charge.”

Falana also asked the court to free his client, who has suffered numerous health challenges as a result of his incarceration.

Related posts

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.