Abuja-based legal practitioner, Onyedikachi Ifedi, has issued a blistering rebuke of Nigeria’s judiciary, declaring that the Supreme Court’s December 15, 2023 judgment—now being used to prosecute Biafra agitator Nnamdi Kanu—amounts to nothing less than a catastrophic betrayal of the Constitution and the rule of law.
In a fiery statement released Saturday, Ifedi implored the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA), Senior Advocates of Nigeria, civil rights organizations, and the media to “call out the grave dangers embedded in the apex court’s ruling” and mobilize efforts to have the decision reversed.
“The case of Mazi Nnamdi Kanu,” he warned, “is the ultimate test of Nigeria’s fidelity or lack thereof, to the Rule of Law. The Supreme Court has chosen to bless state criminality.
“It condoned the Federal Government’s kidnapping of Kanu from Kenya and is now permitting a trial built on illegality. This is a dangerous leap from the rule of law to the rule of judicial tyranny.”
Ifedi branded the judgment per incuriam—“rendered in ignorance of binding law” and “a legal nullity…worthless on its face.”
He stressed that this isn’t about whether Kanu is guilty or innocent but about whether the nation’s highest court can shred the Constitution for the sake of one man.
The lawyer dismantled the government’s narrative that Kanu’s abduction and extraordinary rendition were “technicalities.” Calling that claim a “profound misrepresentation,” he underscored the doctrine of nullity—a principle that renders any proceeding void when founded on a fundamental breach of law.
“The government did not merely make a procedural error,” Ifedi said. “It committed an international crime—extraordinary rendition—bypassing Kenyan courts, violating extradition treaties, and subjecting Kanu to torture and denial of counsel.
“You cannot build a legitimate trial on an illegitimate foundation. The fruit of the poisonous tree doctrine applies in full.”
He cited decades of binding precedents to include Ariori vs. Elemo (1983): “Any breach of the rules of natural justice renders the whole proceeding a nullity.”
Adigun vs. A.G. Oyo State (1987): Violating fair hearing is a “fundamental vice” that collapses everything built upon it.
Nigeria’s own Constitution (Section 36) and the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights (Articles 6 & 7) guarantee fair hearing and due process as non-derogable rights—rights that cannot be suspended even in war.
Ifedi also invoked the Kenyan High Court’s landmark judgment of June 24, 2025, which independently confirmed the Nigerian Court of Appeal’s 2022 findings against the government’s actions. “For the Supreme Court to disregard both Nigerian and Kenyan rulings is to mock justice and embarrass our country before the international community,” he charged.
The implications, he warned, are chilling:
“If this stands, the State can kidnap anyone, anywhere. Your passport and foreign travel offer no protection. The government can violate your most sacred rights and simply ‘cure’ its crimes with damages later. That is not justice—it is tyranny for hire.”
Ifedi urged the NBA, human rights lawyers, and civil society to mount pressure: “The integrity of Nigeria’s entire legal system hangs in the balance.” He called on the international community to take notice and apply diplomatic pressure to uphold global human rights norms.
The path forward, he insisted, is unambiguous:
“The Supreme Court must review and overturn its own decision. The proceedings against Mazi Nnamdi Kanu must be declared a nullity, and he must be released. Only then will Nigeria reaffirm that the Constitution—not the whims of the state—is supreme. For the sake of every Nigerian, we must defend the law.”
