Nnamdi Kanu’s family rejects court judgment, cites legal irregularities
The family of jailed Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) leader, Nnamdi Kanu, has rejected the recent judgment delivered by Justice James Omotosho of the Federal High Court in Abuja.
In a statement issued on Monday and signed by Emmanuel Kanu on behalf of the Okwu Kanu family, they said they were speaking “with heavy hearts but absolute clarity” regarding the ruling.
The family raised concerns about several legal points they presented in court, including Section 36(12) of the Constitution, Supreme Court decisions on repealed laws, and previous directives related to earlier charges. They emphasised that constitutional safeguards are critical, noting: “No person shall be convicted unless the offence is defined in a written law in force at the time,” citing prior Supreme Court rulings that support this principle.
They also questioned the court’s reliance on a transition or savings clause, arguing that it may not apply because, in their view, Kanu’s case was not pending at the relevant time. The family pointed out that the Court of Appeal had previously discharged and acquitted him, effectively terminating all prior charges. They added that the new charges brought before Justice Omotosho represented a fresh case, commencing de novo.
The statement highlighted the importance of constitutional protections under Section 36, including the right to be tried only under laws in force, to be informed of the charges, and not to be convicted under repealed or non-existent laws.
Regarding legal hierarchy, the family stressed: “No transition clause can override Section 36. No statute can override the Constitution. No judge can override the Supreme Court.” They called for strict adherence to the Constitution and established legal procedures, saying all proceedings must align with existing laws.
Justice Omotosho had convicted Kanu on all seven counts of terrorism offences. He sentenced Kanu to life imprisonment on counts one, two, four, five, and six, a 20-year jail term on count three, and a five-year jail term on count seven, with no option of fines. The court opted for life imprisonment instead of the death penalty.
#UTVAfrica#
