Kanu made the disclosure while reacting to the revoking of the bail granted to him in 2017, after his continued absence in court, insisting he is innocent of the accusations against him.
Justice Binta Nyako had, last week, revoked the bail earlier granted Kanu for not appearing in the court and said he would be tried in absentia.
Kanu, who is facing trial alongside other Biafran activists for alleged treason accused Justice Binta Nyako of the Federal High Court, Abuja, who is handling his case and four others, of having compromised, and said she should stop acting as the prosecutor.
In his special broadcast, yesterday, Kanu said: “I wholeheartedly welcome this development of my bail revocation and I’m looking forward to Nyako being ventilated at the world stage.”
He said the best thing that could ever happen to his march towards freedom is Nyako’s court and her ill-conceived and vindictive pronouncements.
“Should they request Interpol intervention in this matter, I ‘ll give my lawyers here, in the United Kingdom, the instruction we need to launch a no-holds-barred legal assault on the country. So, I’m waiting for them. Europe and Interpol are not a bunch of wild beasts.
“In Europe, there is rule of law, which is also binding on Interpol too. My lawyers are waiting for an Interpol red notice against my name, and all hell will break loose. If the intention of Nyako is to curtail my travels, thereby, limiting IPOB diplomatic offensive, then, let me assure Biafrans that our enemies have failed too.
“I’ll continue to travel to and from civilised countries where rule of law obtains. I’m Biafran that holds British citizenship. Nigerian law courts and their poorly educated judges are of no consequence to me. Nyako should stop acting as the prosecutor in this case, which is a position she assumed right from the onset.
“She has no jurisdiction to hear the case, which is why she never allows my lawyer to speak in court. Why must she shout down my lawyers in court, while giving all the time in the world to make their weak argument.
“If she is confident there is a prosecutable offence before her, she should hear the motion before challenging the jurisdiction of her court.
“She chooses which application to entertain and which one to reject. No judge worth her salt will ride rough over the sensitive issue of jurisdiction in her own court.
“Best practice dictates that you dispose of any jurisdictional issues before proceeding to substantive hearing. Up till today, no credible witness nor evidence has been presented before Nyako. This takes me back to one of her rulings when she was reminded in her own court that there isn’t any evidence to support the bogus charge of treasonable felony.
“It is highly unfortunate that Nyako, through her actions and conduct may have given her approval for the invasion of my house with the sole intention to kill me, since she lacked the evidence to convict me in a court of law.
“If not, she would have asked questions about how the military invaded my house and killed 28 people, including Jack, my dog.
“What Nyako is saying is that the death of 28 human beings is of no consequence to her. The reason Nyako is insisting on my appearance before her court is to set me up for assassination by the Nigerian military, yet again, since their plan to kill me on September 14, 2017 failed.