Nnamdi Kanu, the detained leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), on Tuesday, weighed in on the Supreme Court’s judgment that declined his release last week.
The IPOB leader highlighted that while the court acknowledged the unlawful actions—his rendition from Kenya and the revocation of bail by the Nigerian government—it upheld his continued detention, which he views as a contradiction to the Nigerian constitution.
Speaking in response to the Supreme Court’s ruling against his continued detention despite the Court of Appeal’s order for his release, Kanu, through his legal representative Barrister Ifeanyi Ejiofor, questioned whether the apex court effectively nullified constitutional provisions cited for his release while reiterating the government’s unlawful actions.
The judgment, delivered by Justice Emmanuel Agim but written by Justice Garba Lawal, nullified the Court of Appeal’s decision for Kanu’s release, instructing the trial court to proceed with the case despite acknowledging the government’s unlawful actions during Kanu’s detainment.
“Onyendu seized the opportunity offered by the visit to remind Ezigbo Umuchineke that he is not broken by whatever situation he is faced with, but they should be doubly assured that he shall emerge victorious in the end.
“The eventual verdict of the Supreme Court was conveyed to Nnamdi Kanu and he expressed reservations on the outcome.
“However, Kanu elected to accept this outcome because of the finality of the Supreme Court decisions and not because they are infallible, but because the Supreme Court is the final court in the land.
“Nevertheless, in accepting this verdict, Onyendu specifically requested that the following compelling questions be put out publicly to the discerning members of the public, who are keenly following the trajectory of this case: to wit:
“Did the decision of the Supreme Court which substantially sanctioned the Federal Government’s illegal act of Onyendu Mazi Nnamdi Kanu’s abduction and extraordinary rendition to Nigeria, effectively repeal the following Nigerian laws which were all cited in our brief before the Supreme Court?” he queried.
According to Ejiofor, Kanu’s legal team cited before the Supreme Court that Section 15 of the Extradition Act Cap E25 Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 2004, provides as follows:
READ ALSO: ‘We’ll Overcome Insecurity Next Year’ — FG
“Where, in accordance with the law of any country within the Commonwealth or in pursuance of an extradition agreement between Nigeria and another Country (whether within the Commonwealth or not), any person accused of or unlawfully at large after conviction of an offence committed within the jurisdiction of Nigeria is surrendered to Nigeria by the country in question, then, so long as he has not had a reasonable opportunity to returning to that country, that person shall not be detained (whether under this Act or otherwise), tried or otherwise dealt with in Nigeria for or in respect of an offence committed by him before his surrender to Nigeria other than –
“a) The offence for which he was surrendered or any lesser offence which may be proved by the facts on which his surrender was granted; or
“b) Any other offence (being one corresponding to an offence described in section 20 of this Act) of the same nature as the offence for which he was surrendered.
“Provided that a person falling within this section shall not be detained or tried for an offence by virtue of paragraph (b) of this section without the prior consent of the country surrendering him.”
He stated that Article 12(4) of the African Charter on Human and Peoples Rights (Ratification and Enforcement) Act Cap A9, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 2004, which provides as follows:
“A non-national legally admitted in a territory of a State Party to the present Charter, may only be expelled from it by virtue of a decision taken in accordance with the law.”
Ejiofor said, “The above laws, for the avoidance of any doubt, are all Nigerian laws on extradition and extraordinary rendition of citizens from foreign lands.
“Other international Instruments and Conventions to which Nigeria is a state party and bound by, which made similar provisions include: The OAU Convention on the Prevention and Combating of Terrorism; Principles and Guidelines on Human and Peoples’ Right while Countering Terrorism in Africa; and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.”
According to Ejiofor, Kanu said, “Public perspective/positions on the possible implication of the Supreme Court’s judgment of 15th December 2023, on the above laws, will further demonstrate the grave prejudice Onyendu Mazi Nnamdi Kanu has suffered in the hands of the Federal Government of Nigeria.”
Kanu encouraged his supporters to remain focused, keep their eyes on the ball and continue to conduct themselves peacefully.
