The legal team representing the detained leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Mazi Nnamdi Kanu, has warned that the continued prosecution of their client is damaging the credibility of Nigeria’s judiciary and eroding public confidence in the justice system.
In a statement issued on Thursday, October 9, 2025, and signed by Njoku Jude Njoku, Esq., for the Mazi Nnamdi Kanu Global Defence Consortium, the lawyers accused the Federal High Court, Abuja, of violating constitutional principles and judicial ethics in the handling of the case before Justice James Omotosho.
Njoku described proceedings in court on Wednesday, October 8, as “a national embarrassment and a tragic commentary on the state of the Nigerian judiciary,” condemning the adjournment of the case over the absence of a medical report from the Nigerian Medical Association (NMA).
“The absence of the report was not the real reason for the adjournment,” he said. “It has become part of a pattern of delays that weaken faith in due process and the rule of law.”
He argued that Kanu’s ongoing trial under the Terrorism (Prevention) Act 2011 and its 2013 Amendment is unlawful, noting that both statutes were repealed by the Terrorism (Prevention and Prohibition) Act (TPPA) of 2022.
“The Nigerian Constitution is clear — no person can be tried under a law that has ceased to exist,” Njoku stated. “Section 36(12) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended) makes that position unambiguous.”
Citing Section 122(2)(a) of the Evidence Act 2011, he maintained that courts are constitutionally bound to take judicial notice of existing and repealed laws, and failure to do so renders any trial under a repealed law invalid.
“The court has a duty to ensure justice in line with the law as it stands, not as it once was,” he added.
The defence cited previous judicial authorities, including Ariori v. Elemo (1983) and Obiuweubi v. CBN (2011), to support its argument that all actions under a repealed law collapse unless preserved by a saving clause — which, according to Njoku, does not exist in this instance.
“Continuing this trial under a repealed law is inconsistent with constitutional justice,” he declared.
The statement also faulted what it described as “institutional failures” that enable disregard for court orders and due process.
“Every day that this case lingers is another day the judiciary loses its moral standing before the public,” Njoku said. “The courts must not appear to reward disobedience or compromise their independence in politically sensitive cases.”
He urged the judiciary to uphold its constitutional duty and defend its independence. “The judiciary’s integrity is tested not by ordinary cases but by those that challenge its courage,” he said. “When courts allow technicalities or external pressures to dictate their actions, justice suffers.”
The Mazi Nnamdi Kanu Global Defence Consortium reiterated its stance that the trial is a nullity and called for its immediate termination, urging compliance with the Court of Appeal judgment of October 13, 2022, which it said remains binding.
“The continued detention of Mazi Nnamdi Kanu is contrary to the Constitution and established judicial precedents,” Njoku concluded. “Nigeria is at a crossroads — between respect for the rule of law and the erosion of constitutional governance. The judiciary must choose the path of justice, and history will remember those who stood for what is right.”
srfuj4