Nnamdi Kanu’s lawyers say his terrorism conviction “died the moment it was delivered,” insisting the Federal High Court judgment is legally void because it rested on a repealed law.
Rather than start with the court’s action, the defence team flipped the spotlight to what they call the fatal defect in the trial: the law used no longer exists.
Lead counsel Njoku Jude Njoku, Esq., said Justice James Omotosho relied on the defunct Terrorism (Prevention) (Amendment) Act 2013, even though the National Assembly replaced it with the Terrorism (Prevention and Prohibition) Act 2022.
“A dead law cannot convict a living citizen,” Njoku said. “The judge tried to breathe life into a corpse.”
Njoku anchored his argument on two sections of the 2022 Act:
Section 97 — which commands that any ongoing trial shall continue under the new law.
Section 98(3) — which protects only earlier investigative steps, not new convictions under the repealed Act.
“Section 97 leaves no room for judicial discretion. And Section 98(3) does not resurrect the old Act. Not even the Supreme Court can do that,” he stated.
The defence suggested the ruling was engineered for convenience rather than legality.
“What happened on November 20 was a script. The outcome was predetermined. Politics overshadowed justice,” Njoku alleged.
Njoku said allowing the judgment to stand would open the door to future abuses.
“If this survives, any Nigerian can be convicted under a non-existent law tomorrow. That’s how tyranny starts,” he warned.
Kanu’s team confirmed it has appealed the judgment, saying the Court of Appeal will have “no difficulty” overturning what it calls a legal impossibility.
“Even if the higher courts fail, history has noted what happened in broad daylight,” Njoku added.
‘A Script, Not a Trial’: Kanu’s Lawyers Charge Court with Political Conviction
