Nnamdi Kanu, the detained leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra, IPOB, has partially accepted the judgement of Nigeria Supreme Court of Justice with compelling questions over the judgement that overruled the order of the lower Federal Court of Appeal that he should be released unconditionally as he has no case to answer.

Nnamdi Kanu reactions to the Supreme Court judgement delivered last Friday in Abuja was made known on by his lawyer, Barrister Ifeanyi Ejiofor after the weekly routine visit to the detained Biafra agitation leader at the Department of State Services, DSS custody.

Barrister Ifeanyi Ejiofor statement reads in quotes below thus: “Today, our legal team, ably led by  the erudite Professor of Law, Chief Mike Ozekhome (SAN), visited Onyendu Mazi Nnamdi Kanu at the SSS Headquarters Abuja, where he is being illegally held in solitary confinement to formally brief him on the outcome of the Supreme Court Judgement, delivered in his Matter on the 15th day of December 2023.

“Onyendu was fully briefed on the salient findings of the Apex Court, which pronouncements:

“1) unequivocally condemned in strong terms, the illegal invasion of Onyendu Mazi Nnamdi Kanu‘s ancestral home in Afara Ukwu, Ibeku, Umuahia, Abia State by the Nigerian Security Agencies on the 14th day of September 2017, where numerous innocent civilians were murdered in cold blood.

“2) condemned and declared as unlawful the consequent revocation of Onyendu Mazi Nnamdi Kanu’s bail by the trial Court, which Order was granted on application filed by the same Federal Government that had through its security agencies invaded Onyendu Mazi Nnamdi Kanu’s house, even when he was on Court’s bail, and awaiting to appear in Court on a given date for trial to commence.

“3) condemned the kidnap of Onyendu Mazi Nnamdi Kanu from Kenya by the Nigeria Security Agents and his subsequent extraordinary rendition to Nigeria.

“4) roundly condemned the illegality of the actions of the Federal Government in the use of brute force to kidnap a citizen from a foreign land without first subjecting the person to extradition proceedings.

“The eventual verdict of the Supreme Court was conveyed to Onyendu Mazi Nnamdi Kanu, and he expressed reservations on the outcome. However, Onyendu elected to accept this outcome because of the finality of the Supreme Court Decisions, and not because they are infallible, but because they are infallible for the fact that 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?

“1. Section 15 of the Extradition Act Cap E25 Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 2004, which provides as follows:

“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.”

“2. 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.”

“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.

“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.

“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.

“Onyendu once again thanked Ezigbo UmuChineke for your prayers and love, even as he encouraged all to remain focused and keep their eyes on the ball. Onyendu enjoined his followers to continue to conduct themselves in peaceful manner as they have always done”.

It would be recalled that Nigeria apex court, Supreme Court of Justice had ruled that the detained leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra, Mazi Nnamdi Kanu has case to answer, adding, there is no existing law in Nigeria that stops a court of law from entertaining trial of a suspect simply because the suspect rights were violated by the prosecutor.

The Supreme Court in its ruling last Friday set aside a judgment by the lower court that dismissed the terrorism charges against the leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra, Nnamdi Kanu in October 2022.

According to Punch Newspaper Correspondent, the apex court held that the court of appeal was wrong and that the trial court couldn’t try him because the prosecution violated his rights.

Excerpts of the newspaper Correspondent report reads thus below:

In the judgment prepared by Justice Garba Mohammed, the court condemned the invasion of Kanu’s residence, declaring it irresponsible.

The court held that there is no law in the country stopping a trial based on the violation of the rights of a suspect.

Mohammed said, “If the police should destroy the house of a suspect to obtain exhibits, should that diverse the court against entertaining the offence?

“His remedy should be the way of civil proceeding. Proceedings can’t be stopped on account of the violation of the rights of the suspects; that is not our law for now.

“We decided not to go with the court of appeal. Though we condemned the violation of his rights, Nigeria must redeem its image and adhere to the rule of law. If a person has been granted bail, why did you invade his house? That is irresponsible. You shouldn’t blame him for running.

“No legislation in the country stripped the trial court of the jurisdiction to go ahead with Kanu’s case, despite the illegal action of the FG.

“The law must take its course. The Court of Appeal was wrong that the trial court couldn’t try him. The appeal is allowed, and the cross-appeal is dismissed.”

Kanu was first arrested in 2015 under the administration of former Nigerian President Muhammadu Buhari.

He was subsequently granted bail in April 2017 and fled the country after an invasion of his home in Afara-Ukwu, near Umuahia, Abia State, by the Nigerian military in September 2017.

Kanu was re-arrested in Kenya and brought back to Nigeria in June 2021.

He was arraigned before the Federal High Court in Abuja on four charges of treasonable felony, conspiracy to commit treasonable felony, illegal importation of radio equipment, and defamation of former President Muhammadu Buhari.

The charges were later withdrawn by the former Attorney General of the Federation, Abubakar Malami, SAN, who replaced them with a fresh 14-count charge bordering on terrorism and membership in a proscribed group, among others.

The court, however, reduced the charges to seven.

The Court of Appeal sitting in Abuja on October 13, 2022, held that how Kanu was renditioned to the country violated the country’s extradition treaty and was also a breach of his fundamental human rights.

The appellate court also struck out the terrorism charges filed against Kanu by the Nigerian government and ordered his release from the DSS facility.

The FG, through the office of the Attorney-General of the Federation, appealed the court ruling and subsequently obtained an order staying the execution of the court judgement at the Supreme Court.

Kanu, through his lawyers, filed an appeal against the stay of execution order at the apex court on November 3, 2022.

Displeased by the verdict of the appellate court, the FG filed an appeal at the Supreme Court.