Freedom eluded the leader of the outlawed southeast self-determination group, Indigenous People of Biafra, Nnamdi Kanu, as the Supreme Court court ruled he must stand trial notwithstanding the illegal process by which he was arraigned before the court, writes Alex Enumah
Hope that the detained leader of the proscribed Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Mazi Nnamdi Kanu, would spend the 2023 Christmas outside the confines of the Department of State Service (DSS) where he had spent the past two Christmas, was dashed on Friday, following the refusal of the Supreme Court to upheld the judgment of the Court of Appeal which last year freed Kanu of criminal offences.
Besides Kanu, hope of his teaming supporters as well as residents of the Southeast geopolitical zone; who had believed that Kanu’s release would bring a drastic reduction in the grave insecurity in the region were also dashed by the judgment of a five-member panel led by Justice Kudirat Kekere-Ekun. Even in the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), Abuja, venue of Nnamdi Kanu’s trial on alleged acts of terrorism, treasonable felony amongst others, succour experienced since last year when the appellate court ordered for the IPOB leader’s freedom has suddenly evaporated into thin air.
Although, the sit-at-home order by IPOB each time the trial comes up, is limited to the southeast, the order no doubt affects people from other regions who may want to do business in the southeast on trial days as nothing goes into or comes out of the region on court’s days. Similarly, businesses, commuters and civil servants in the Central Business District of the FCT, where the Federal High Court is located, usually go through harrowing experiences due to the militarization of the area by security agents. In addition, hearing in other matters at the Federal High Court, Abuja suffer setbacks as litigants and their lawyers hardly make it into the court as the area is condoned off, preventing most people from accessing the court. Not left out are journalists, who must be thoroughly screened with only a handful allowed to monitor the proceedings.
Since October this year, when the apex court adjourned to December 15, for judgment in the federal government’s appeal against the release of the secessionist fighter, some people, especially in the southeast suffering more from the continued detention of Kanu had hoped and prayed for a favourable judgment.
A leader of the southeast and former Governor of Anambra State, Chief Chukwuemeka Ezeife, who had joined others to hope and pray for the release of Kanu, was reported to have died on the day the apex court in its judgment declined to free Kanu from the government’s charges.
The apex court in its judgment delivered by Justice Mohammed Garba insisted that Kanu must continue with his trial, notwithstanding the breach of international laws and conventions by the federal government in the abduction of Kanu from Kenya.
Ezeife, no doubt would have had his hope dashed if alive to have witnessed the proceedings. It should be pointed out that another leader of thought from the Igbo extraction and nationalist, Professor Ben Nwabueze, who had been in the forefront of campaign for Kanu’s unconditional release had died recently without seeing the release of Kanu.
The self-acclaimed leader of IPOB was first arrested by security operatives in October, 2015, in his hotel room at the Golden Tulip Hotel in Ikeja, Lagos State. He was then brought to Abuja, for trial. The first charge which was filed on December 18, 2015 had only six counts bordering on conspiracy and treasonable felony, among others.
He was initially charged alongside Benjamin Madubugwu and David Nwawuisi. The federal government later amended the charge from six to 11 and brought in two other defendants making a total of five.
The two other defendants are Chidiebere Onwudiwe and Bright Chimezie.
Besides, between 2015 and 2016, the defendants were arraigned before three different judges of the Federal High Court in Abuja. They were earlier arraigned before Justice Ahmed Mohammed and Justice John Tsoho (Now Chief Judge) and lastly before Justice Binta Nyako.
Although, they all pleaded not guilty, the court however initially denied them bail until 2017, when on health grounds, Kanu was admitted to N100m bail with three sureties in like sum. The court in addition held that one of the sureties must be a religious leader.
However, few months after he was admitted to bail on health grounds, Kanu had fled the country in September 2017, after the military invaded his family’s home in Afara-Ukwu, near Umuahia, Abia State.
The situation led the federal government to apply for the revocation of his bail which was granted in 2019, by Justice Binta Nyako of the Federal High Court, Abuja.
Besides, the court ordered for the arrest of the IPOB leader, wherever he may be found. Besides, the prosection also prayed the court to separate the trial of Nnamdi Kanu from the other four defendants, pending when he would be re-arrested and brought before the court to continue his trial.
The federal government’s request was granted and based on the court’s order, a combined security agents in collaboration with international police, arrested Nnamdi Kanu in Kenya, in June 2021, and forcefully brought him back to Nigeria, to continue his trial. The federal government subsequently re-arraigned him on an amended 15-count charge, bordering on treasonable felony, among others.
But, Kanu represented by his team of lawyers led by Prof Mike Ozekhome, SAN, urged the court to dismiss the fresh charge and free the IPOB leader, claiming that the illegal process through which Kanu was brought into the country renders the charge incompetent and robbed the court of jurisdiction.
In her judgment, Justice Nyako struck out eight out of the 15 count charge and ordered Kanu to stand trial on the remaining charge. Dissatisfied, Kanu approached the appellate court to challenge the decision of Justice Nyako. He had hinged his case on the grounds that his forceful return from Kenya to Nigeria, was unlawful, illegal, null and void, hence the federal government has no basis to try him on the former alleged offences of terrorism and treasonable felony.
Although, the federal government opposed the appeal and urged that Kanu be ordered to stand trial in the remaining seven count charge at the trial court, the appellate court however disagreed. In the lead judgment delivered on October 13, 2022 by Justice Oludotun Adebola, the Court of Appeal ruled in favour of Kanu and declared as illegal and unlawful, the abduction of Kanu from Kenya to Nigeria. The appellate court subsequently quashed the entire terrorism charges brought against appellant by the federal government.
The appellate court agreed with Ozekhome that the federal government violated rules of engagement in the ways and manners Kanu was arrested in Kenya and brought to Nigeria. Specifically, the Court of Appeal held that the Nigerian government broke the international laws and resorted to self help in its failure to file extradition charge against the IPOB leader in Kenya, adding that the unlawful abduction and rendition of the appellant rendered the charge incompetent and also divest the court of jurisdiction.
In allowing the appeal, the appellate court had ordered immediate and unconditional release of Kanu from the custody of the Department of the State Service (DSS). The Court also prohibited the federal government from further detaining or prosecuting Kanu on any indictment or charge before any court in Nigeria.
Miffed by the decision of the Court of Appeal, the federal government took the case to the Supreme Court with a request to quash the findings of the Court of Appeal and restore the trial of Kanu on treasonable felony at the Federal High Court, Abuja.
Delivering its judgment last Friday, the Supreme court held that Kanu must stand trial irrespective of the way he was brought back to the country to continue his trial.
The apex court, although, condemned the security agencies for breaching international laws and conventions by the forceful rendition of Nnamdi Kanu to face trial, held that it was not enough reason to void the charge against Kanu.
The court which blamed the security agencies for Kanu’s breach of his bail, said the military acted irresponsibly when they invaded Kanu’s family home, adding that the trial court was wrong and unfair in revoking the bail it granted Kanu.
It, however, held that Kanu’s lawyers should have instituted a civil litigation case over the destruction and illegality, rather than positing that the illegality rendered the charge incompetent.
Besides, the apex court in the judgment read by Justice Emmanuel Agim, noted that there is no known Nigerian law that voids the prosecution or trial of an accused because of illegality of law enforcement agents. He added that the respondents did not cite any authority to back their claims that a forceful rendition of a defendant robs a court of jurisdiction to try the defendant on criminal charge preferred against him or her.
Agim pointed out that Nigerian law has not developed to a point where a person would not be charged for an alleged offence because of some illegal actions of the police. He held that the Court of Appeal was wrong in quashing the charge against Kanu because of the illegalities surrounding his repatriation to the country.
The Supreme Court subsequently upheld the appeal of the federal government and ordered trial of Nnamdi Kanu on the remaining seven count charge at the Federal High Court, Abuja.
However, how this decision would affect the southeast would be clearer in the next coming days. Recall that the agitators had recently suspended the Monday sit-at- home order in anticipation of their leader’s release from custody. That singular action has brought relative peace in the zone, thereby encouraging a lot of persons hitherto scared of traveling home for the Christmas festivities due to activities of “unknown gunmen” to now travel.
Since Kanu’s arrest in 2015, the southeast has not known peace, not with the wanton destruction of hundreds of innocent lives and destruction of properties worth billions of Naira in the five eastern states in the country. Besides, the federal government is spending huge budget in the area just to tackle activities of unknown gunmen, who go about targeting security agents and some innocent citizens. It is an understatement to say that the economy of the region is near comatose as a result of insecurity created by Kanu’s continued detention by the federal government.
To avert a return to self help and degeneration of security in the region, it’s high time a political solution was vigorously pursued and achieved timeously by critical stakeholders and agents of peace. The issue should not be allowed to linger.
