Court set to rule in Eze Ndigbo’s bail application over alleged terrorism

<h2></h2>, <p>According to reports, Nwajagu, was arrested by the DSS over an alleged threat to invite members of IPOB to Lagos to secure properties of Igbo people in the state.</p>, <span>”Eze Ndigbo of Ajao Estate”, Frederick Nwajagu</span>, <h2>A high court in Lagos State on Tuesday, July 25, 2023 fixed Friday for ruling in a bail application filed by the ”Eze Ndigbo of Ajao Estate”, Frederick Nwajagu.</h2>, <p>Nwajagu, had on Tuesday prayed the court to admit him to bail on liberal terms. The defendant is charged with terrorism offences, also told the court that he was not a flight risk.</p>, <p>Justice Yetunde Adesanya, fixed the date after listening t arguments from both counsel. The judge adjourned the case until Friday for ruling in the bail application.</p>, <p>NAN reports that Nwajagu was arraigned on May 9, on a nine-count charge including an attempt to commit acts of terrorism, financing terrorism, participating in terrorism and meeting to support a proscribed entity.</p>, <p>The Prosecution Counsel, Mr Jonathan Ogunsakin the Lagos State Counsel, informed the court that the case was for argument on bail application. However, counsel to the defendant, Mr E. C. Obiagu, SAN, told the court that the defendant’s bail application was based on two relieves.</p>, <p>According to him, the defendant is seeking for an order of the court admitting him to bail and an order restraining the respondent from re-arresting him if granted bail. The Obiagu said that the bail application was supported by a seven-paragraph affidavit, attached with the defendant’s medical report and a written address.</p>, <p>He said he relied on all the paragraphs of the affidavit and a written address and he had responded to the counter-affidavit filed by the prosecution by filing a further and better affidavit. Obiagu said that he has also responded on points of law to the counter-affidavit.</p>, <p>He said: “Your Lordship has the discretion to grant bail on liberal terms or on self recognizance. The defendant is not a flight risk. He does