IPOB Issues Internal Communication on Media Reports Surrounding Nnamdi Kanu’s Ongoing Trial

Also Read

The Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) has released an internal communication to its members across the world, addressing what it describes as “misleading narratives” surrounding the ongoing court proceedings involving its detained leader, Mazi Nnamdi Kanu.

The directive, signed by IPOB’s spokesperson, Comrade Emma Powerful, and addressed to all family units, coordinators, and media volunteers, urged members to remain calm, disciplined, and guided by verified legal facts in responding to media reports.

According to the document, IPOB leadership cautioned members to expect increased media activity suggesting that Nnamdi Kanu had “refused to defend himself” or “forfeited his right to defence” before the Federal High Court in Abuja. The group maintained that such claims misrepresent the legal position of its leader.

Focus on Legal Foundation

In the memo, IPOB reiterated that Kanu’s legal team has consistently questioned the validity of the law under which he is being tried.
The group referenced Section 36(12) of the 1999 Nigerian Constitution, which states 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.”

IPOB argued that this constitutional provision guarantees that no Nigerian can be prosecuted or convicted under a repealed or non-existent law.

The organisation also referred to the Terrorism (Prevention and Prohibition) Act, 2022, noting that it replaced the earlier 2013 amendment under which, according to the group, the current charges were framed.

Extradition and Jurisdiction Concerns

The directive further raised questions about the legality of Kanu’s extradition from Kenya in 2021, citing what it called a violation of international legal norms. IPOB referenced the “double-criminality rule” under Section 76(1)(d)(iii) of the 2022 Terrorism Act, which, it said, requires the approval of the extraditing country before any trial can proceed.

Position on Defence

Addressing claims that Kanu had declined to present a defence, IPOB said the decision was based on constitutional grounds.
According to the group, “An accused person cannot be compelled to defend himself where the validity of the law being applied remains in question.”

The organisation said Kanu’s stance was “a lawful and deliberate strategy” to compel the court to clarify the legal basis of the charges before proceeding to trial.

Media Caution and Member Conduct

The internal directive advised IPOB supporters and media volunteers to refrain from engaging in emotional or unverified online arguments regarding the case.
It instructed members to rely on constitutional facts and court documents rather than social media commentary, emphasizing that misinformation could mislead the public or distort the legal discourse.

The statement concluded by urging members to “remain informed and disciplined,” assuring them that further guidance would be provided as the case progresses.

Background

Mazi Nnamdi Kanu, leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra, has been facing trial on charges bordering on treasonable felony and terrorism. His legal team has, however, consistently challenged both the process of his extradition from Kenya and the legality of the charges filed against him.

The case continues before Justice James Omotosho of the Federal High Court in Abuja, with judgment expected to determine whether the prosecution has established a valid legal foundation for trial under Nigerian law.