FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:IPOB Refutes Reports Claiming Nnamdi Kanu Forfeited Right to Defense

Also Read

 

Group Says Ongoing Trial Lacks Legal Basis Under Nigerian Constitution

 The Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) has dismissed as false recent media reports suggesting that its leader, Mazi Nnamdi Kanu, has forfeited his right to defense in the ongoing trial before Justice James Kolawole Omotosho of the Federal High Court, Abuja.

In a statement issued by Comrade Emma Powerful, IPOB’s spokesperson, the group described the reports

as “a calculated attempt to mislead the public and conceal the irregularities surrounding the case.” IPOB maintained that Mazi Nnamdi Kanu has not forfeited his right to defend himself, insisting instead that the proceedings lack a valid legal foundation.

> “There is no existing written law in Nigeria that supports the current charges against Mazi Nnamdi Kanu,” the statement read. “The Nigerian Constitution is clear — no one can be tried or convicted for an offence that is not defined in a valid written law.”

Citing Section 36(12) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended), IPOB emphasized that:

> “A person shall not be convicted of a criminal offence unless that offence is defined and the penalty therefor is prescribed in a written law.”

The group further referenced several Supreme Court judgments — including Aoko v. Fagbemi (1961), Attorney General of the Federation v. Abubakar (2007), and NNPC v. Fawehinmi (1998) — to reinforce its argument that “no conviction can stand without a subsisting law.”

IPOB accused the trial judge of compelling its leader to proceed with a defense in a case “that lacks legal legitimacy,” describing the development as a violation of fair hearing principles.

> “You cannot compel a defendant to defend himself against a non-existent charge. The rule of law must prevail,” the statement continued.

The group also questioned the decision of the court to allegedly proceed toward judgment without allowing final addresses from both parties, calling the move “unusual and contrary to due process in criminal proceedings.”

> “If that position is accurate, it raises serious questions about judicial propriety and adherence to procedure,” IPOB added.

Concluding, the group reaffirmed its support for Mazi Nnamdi Kanu’s position not to “legitimize an unlawful process,” calling on Nigerians to stay informed about their constitutional rights and urging the judiciary to uphold the supremacy of the law.