Global Defence Consortium accuses court of ignoring repeal of terrorism law; calls for Mazi Nnamdi Kanu’s release
The Mazi Nnamdi Kanu Global Defence Consortium has accused the Federal High Court in Abuja of violating constitutional provisions in the ongoing trial of the detained IPOB leader, Mazi Nnamdi Kanu, describing the process as “a nullity” conducted under a repealed law.
The consortium made the claims in a statement signed by Njoku Jude Njoku, a member of the defence team, following Tuesday’s adjournment of the case before Justice James Omotosho.
Defence faults use of repealed law
According to the statement, the defence insists that the charges against Kanu were filed under the Terrorism (Prevention) Act 2011 and its 2013 Amendment, both of which were repealed by the Terrorism (Prevention and Prohibition) Act 2022.
The lawyers argue that continuing the trial under a repealed statute violates Section 36(12) of the 1999 Constitution, which requires that offences and penalties must be prescribed by an existing law.
They also cited Section 122(2)(a) of the Evidence Act 2011, which mandates courts to take judicial notice of repealed or existing laws, and referenced past Supreme Court decisions, including NNPC v. Fawehinmi (1998) and Obiuweubi v. CBN (2011), to support their position.
The statement urged the court to “strike out or compel amendment of the charge” to reflect the current legal framework, describing the continued prosecution as “a violation of judicial duty and constitutional supremacy.”
Concerns over medical report and institutional integrity
The consortium also criticised the alleged delay in producing a medical report on Kanu’s health by the Nigerian Medical Association (NMA), which it claimed had been directed by the court to provide an independent evaluation.
It described the development as “a breach of professional ethics,” accusing the association of submitting a confidential report to the Attorney-General rather than to the court.
“The continued detention of Mazi Nnamdi Kanu despite these breaches constitutes a grave injustice,” the statement read.
Judicial independence and public confidence
The group warned that the handling of the case could further erode public confidence in the judiciary, urging judges and senior legal practitioners to defend constitutional principles in politically sensitive cases.
“The independence of the judiciary is tested in cases such as this,” the consortium said, calling on the court to order Kanu’s immediate release “in line with the October 13, 2022, judgment of the Court of Appeal.”
Background
Kanu, leader of the proscribed Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), has been in custody of the Department of State Services (DSS) since his re-arrest in 2021. He faces terrorism-related charges before the Federal High Court in Abuja.
In October 2022, the Court of Appeal discharged and acquitted him of similar allegations, ruling that his rendition from Kenya was unlawful. The Federal Government, however, appealed that verdict to the Supreme Court, which later ordered a retrial.
Tuesday’s proceedings were adjourned after the absence of a medical report on Kanu’s health condition.
---
Editor’s Note
The Federal High Court and the Nigerian Medical Association had yet to respond to the allegations as of press time. The Ministry of Justice has consistently maintained that Kanu’s trial follows due process and that all legal proceedings are in line with Nigeria’s anti-terrorism laws.
![[BREAKING NEWS]:Nigerians In Trouble As Leaked Documents Reveals Tinubu’s Agreement with Controversial Business Tycoon](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj39gfKFg8aZ2Pq_eoxzYPY7vQoQB4vJQ5iXjbzlb028e9rhOqJn7LU834VyPOGJO6KMqyY25tdbE8_AbZYrvJ2A-MPe77GnAXXTxKlCpcHy3Xmrpk5voaOwmC_bUYUoWrh8i8Vya7_odsgKRhByqzF7mVi_H-AQTn3iV_Yo1GkZhLibfcuztuBuz3XE4xS/w680/IMG_9371.jpeg)
