Nnamdi Kanu Trial: Family Accuses Nigerian Bar Association of Constitutional Failure in Legal Challenge
The family of detained Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) leader Nnamdi Kanu has launched a scathing critique against the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA), accusing the legal body of failing to uphold constitutional principles in what they describe as an “unlawful” prosecution.
Constitutional Crisis Alleged in Ongoing Trial
In a strongly worded statement signed by Prince Emmanuel Kanu and titled “The NBA’s Silence Is Helping an Unlawful Court Case Against Mazi Nnamdi Kanu, And It Is Breaking Our Constitution,” the family contends that Kanu is being tried under a repealed legal framework that no longer exists in Nigerian law.
The core legal argument centers on the assertion that terrorism charges against Kanu are anchored in the defunct Terrorism (Prevention Amendment) Act 2013, which was replaced by the Terrorism Prevention and Prohibition Act 2022. This raises fundamental questions about the validity of the entire legal proceeding.
Legal Precedent and Constitutional Provisions
The family emphasizes that Section 36(12) of the 1999 Constitution explicitly prohibits any trial based on legislation not currently in force. They further cite multiple Supreme Court rulings that have consistently affirmed that repealed criminal statutes cannot form the basis for prosecution.
“The NBA has failed in its duty, and its silence in the face of clear constitutional violations has allowed an unlawful and fake court case against Mazi Nnamdi Kanu to continue,” the family statement declared.
Jurisdictional Questions and International Law Implications
Beyond the issue of repealed legislation, the family raises significant jurisdictional concerns. They argue that the 2022 Act requires “double criminality” for offenses allegedly committed abroad—meaning the alleged actions must constitute crimes in both Nigeria and the country where they occurred.
This presents a substantial legal hurdle for prosecutors, given that Kenya, where Kanu was arrested in controversial circumstances, has never formally accused him of any criminal activity.
Savings Clause Argument Dismissed
The family’s statement also addresses and dismisses potential attempts to rely on Section 98(3) of the 2022 Act as a “savings clause” that might preserve ongoing cases. They maintain that Kanu’s situation constitutes a fresh trial rather than a continuation, making such provisions inapplicable.
Broader Implications for Nigerian Justice System
The controversy extends far beyond Kanu’s individual case, touching on fundamental questions about the rule of law in Africa’s most populous nation. The family warns that the NBA’s perceived silence sets a dangerous precedent that could affect countless Nigerians facing questionable legal proceedings.
“The rule of law in Nigeria is slowly dying, and the NBA’s silence is part of the reason,” the statement added, suggesting that many citizens suffer wrongful detentions because legal professionals fail to challenge invalid charges.
Professional Body Under Scrutiny
The family’s critique raises uncomfortable questions about the role of professional legal associations in upholding constitutional principles. Their statement pointedly asks whether the NBA “has become afraid of the government” and accuses the body of enabling judicial abuses through its silence.
Legal analysts note that the case represents a critical test for Nigeria’s legal institutions at a time when the country faces multiple security challenges and ongoing debates about federalism and regional autonomy.
Call to Action and Constitutional Defense
The Okwu-Kanu family concludes with a direct appeal to the NBA to publicly affirm that no Nigerian citizen can be legally tried under repealed legislation and to defend constitutional limits on judicial authority.
This development comes amid ongoing tensions in southeastern Nigeria, where Kanu’s detention and trial continue to generate significant political and social unrest, testing the boundaries of Nigeria’s legal framework and its commitment to due process.
This report was based on information from The Herald NG as the primary source.