Why Nigeria has no case against Nnamdi Kanu - Lawyer

Spread the love

Why Nigeria has no case against Nnamdi Kanu – Lawyer

By Steve Oko

A legal luminary, Njoku Jude Njoku, has asserted that despite claims to the contrary, Nigeria has no case against the detained Leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra, IPoB, Mazi Nnamdi Kanu, insisting that his trial is more of political persecution than legal prosecution.

Njoku in a statement yesterday, took time to dissect the case against Kanu, and concluded that the federal government has no grounds in law to continue his incarceration.

Below is a full text of the statement made available to Wawa News Global:

“The Nigerian government keeps saying it has a case against Mazi Nnamdi Kanu, the leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB). But when you strip away the politics and look strictly at the law, that claim falls apart.

“Everything about the case — from how he was seized in Kenya to the laws used to charge him — violates the Nigerian Constitution and international rules that Nigeria itself has signed.

“In short: a case can only stand if it rests on a lawful foundation. Here, that foundation is broken. What’s going on in Abuja is a process, not a lawful prosecution.

“The Constitution Is the Highest Law Not Supreme Court:

Section 1(3) of Nigeria’s 1999 Constitution says that if any law or government action clashes with the Constitution, the Constitution wins — and the other law becomes void.

“That means once government officials break constitutional rules, everything that follows collapses.

You can’t build something on nothing.

“Kanu’s kidnapping from Kenya in 2021, done without any extradition order, broke Nigerian and Kenyan law.

The Court of Appeal in 2022 and the Kenyan High Court in 2025 both said the rendition was illegal. By skipping the proper process, the government destroyed the court’s power (called jurisdiction) to try him.

No later order can fix that.

“Fair Hearing Rights Can’t Be Suspended:

Section 36 of the Constitution protects the right to fair hearing, presumption of innocence, and trial only under valid law.

These rights cannot be taken away — not even in wartime or national emergency.

“So when someone is dragged before a court after being kidnapped, denied proper access to lawyers, and charged under outdated laws, the trial is automatically void.

The Supreme Court and the Court of Appeal have said many times that any case built on such illegality must fall apart.

“The Rendition Broke Both Nigerian and International Law:

The UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention (2022) and the Kenyan courts have already ruled that Kanu’s arrest and transfer were illegal.

Nigeria has signed treaties like the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which forbid that kind of act.

Because those treaties are part of Nigerian law, ignoring them also means breaking the Constitution.

“A trial that begins with a crime by the state itself cannot be legitimate. The Law Used Against Him No Longer Exists:

Most of the charges come from the Terrorism (Prevention) (Amendment) Act 2013.

“That law was repealed in 2022 and replaced with the Terrorism (Prevention and Prohibition) Act 2022.

The new Act changed the definitions of offences and penalties.

You can’t prosecute someone today under a law that no longer exists — that’s retroactive and unconstitutional.

“Even if the government claims there’s a “saving clause,” it can’t override the Constitution or revive a dead statute.

The law is gone; the charges relying on it are dead with it.

“The Court of Appeal Already Freed Him:

On 13 October 2022, the Court of Appeal in Abuja discharged Kanu and said the government had lost jurisdiction because of the illegal rendition.

That decision was final on that point.

Under Section 36(9) of the Constitution — the rule against double jeopardy — once a person is discharged on such grounds, he can’t be retried for the same matter.

“The Supreme Court’s 2023 decision sending the case back for trial ignored that rule and the principle of finality.

In plain English: once a higher court frees you, another court can’t restart the same case.

“Nigeria Is Also Breaking Its Word to the World:

Nigeria voluntarily signed and domesticated treaties that guarantee fair trial and forbid torture or arbitrary detention. Those obligations are binding, not optional. When Nigeria keeps detaining Kanu after foreign and local courts say his transfer was illegal, it damages its credibility and invites sanctions or condemnation.

“Conclusion: What Nigeria now calls “the case against Kanu” exists only on paper.

Legally, it has no heartbeat.

“The Constitution was broken at the start. Fair-hearing rights were trampled.

The law used for the charges has been repealed. The Court of Appeal’s discharge should have ended everything.

A proceeding born in illegality can never become lawful by persistence.

Continuing the trial only deepens the constitutional injury. Under Nigerian and international law, the case against Nnamdi Kanu is void, not valid — a shell without substance.”

“Signed: Njoku Jude Njoku, Esq.

For Mazi Nnamdi Kanu Global Defence Consortium”.

Share on Facebook

Save

Steve Oko, Publisher/C.E.O, WaWa News Global. For more information on advert placement and news coverage, contact us on: 08038725600, or via email stevemanofgod2000@yahoo.com; wawanewsglobal@gmail.com Always read WaWa News Global - Your most dependable online news platform for the latest breaking news in Nigeria.