Biafra: Nnamdi Kanu’s long road to ‘justice’

By Ori Martins

It is really not only long road to justice, but Mazi Nnamdi Kanu’s walk to freedom has been littered with all manner of legal pyrotechnics, political crossfire as well as unprecedented high degree of power calculations and fireworks. The entire mucky game commenced the moment Kanu was first arrested On October 17, 2015 in Lagos by operatives of DSS.

But the tortuous nature of his trial actually began after illegal rendition from Kenya by security agencies, which has further complicated the matter, culminating in his discharge by the Appeal Court a couple of weeks ago to the anger of the federal government expressed through the Attorney General and minister of Justice, Abubakar Malami. This opened a new legal phase in the trial, one that may not end in the life of this government.

After his initial arrest, he was subsequently, arraigned before the Court on November 23, 2015. His lawyers in conjunction with various Igbo groups condemned Kanu’s continued detention and so he was granted bail on October 19, but was never released.

This caused national outcry against the Federal Government of Nigeria as democracy groups, civil society bodies and human rights activists joined forces in calling for his release.

Therefore, Kanu was re-arraigned on November 8, 2016, before Justice Binta Nyako of the Federal High Court, Abuja.

Initially, six count charges were brought against Kanu but was amended to 11-count charge that  bordered on terrorism, treasonable felony, managing an unlawful society and publication of defamatory matters.  The trial of Kanu and three others at the Federal High Court, Abuja, began on January 10, 2017. Eventually, six of the charges were dismissed

Reprieve came the way of Kanu as he was granted  bail on April 28, 2017, on health grounds and was released after perfecting his bail conditions. In all, the IPOB leader spent 18 months in Kuje Prisons. And five months after, the Federal Government of Nigeria officially but controversially proscribed IPOB as a terrorist organization.

While consultation was still ongoing on the best possible way to resolve the Kanu and the federal government fiasco, the Nigerian army, on Sunday, September 10, 2017 allegedly invaded the then director of Radio Biafra’s home. It was alleged that five people were feared dead and several others injured. The invasion took place barely 24 hours after the army had announced the start of its second phase of Operation Python Dance II in the South-Eastern region.

On that account, Kanu escaped from Nigeria and did not appear in court again, thus breaking the condition of his bail.. Within months, he was seen in Israel and finally London.

Expectedly,  Justice Nyako, on March 28, 2019, revoked the bail earlier granted Kanu and asked that he be arrested and brought back to face trial. In view of that, a court hearing was fixed for November 26, 2020, but Kanu and his lawyer, Ifeanyi Ejiofor, failed to show up thus the case was adjourned to January 27, 2021, yet Kanu did not make it to the court.

Events moved fast and on June 29, 2021, news filtered through that Kanu had been re- arrested and detained on June 27. The news was broken by the attorney general and minister of justice, Abubakar Malami.

“Kanu’s travails have been a most delicate one since 2015 when he was first arrested. Since then he has been in and out of detention. First, the court directed he would be granted bail but the Federal Government of Nigeria never effected it.

“He spent about 18 months before the prisons doors were opened for him. Shortly after, the army invaded his country home in Umuahia and he fled for dear life. About four years later he was re-arrested in Kenya of which he has been facing trials since then”, Umunna Ken, a public affairs analysts based in Owerri stated.

In the face of Kanu’s re-arrest and subsequent extradition from Kenya, he was slammed with an amended 16 count charges before an a federal high court in Abuja. The court ruled that the Biafran agitator had cases to answer.

At that moment, Kanu procured the services of Chief Mike Ozekhome, SAN, as his lead counsel, proceeding for appeal. In the interim, he equally filled charges against the Federal Government of Nigeria, insisting that his re-arrest in Kenya and subsequent extraordinary rendition to the country were grossly illegal, never followed due process even as they violated his fundamental human rights.

Nnamdi Kanu demanded N25bn from President Muhammadu Buhari’s government as compensation for the physical, mental, emotional, psychological, property, and other damages suffered due to the infringements of his fundamental rights.

The Federal High Court sitting in Umuahia, Abia State, fixed October 4th, 2022, for the hearing of Kanu’s extraordinary rendition suit.K anu’s Special Counsel, Aloy Ejimakor, issued a statement to that effect.

According to him;  “On 4th October 2022, the Federal High Court, Umuahia will hear Mazi Nnamdi Kanu’s extraordinary rendition suit which I had filed before the court in March this year. The suit is sui generis (of a special class), and it is primarily aimed at redressing the infamous unlawful expulsion or extraordinary rendition of Nnamdi Kanu, which is a clear violation of his fundamental rights under Article 12(4) of the African Charter on Human and Peoples Rights, as well as Chapter IV of the Nigerian Constitution.

“In addition to the rendition, I am asking the Court to redress the myriad violations that came with the rendition, such as the torture, the unlawful detention and the denial of the right to fair hearing which is required by law before anybody can be expelled from one country to the other. I am also seeking to halt his prosecution and restore him to the status quo before he was rendition on 19th June, 2021.

“Even as I had made claims that bordered on rendition, the Court declined jurisdiction on grounds that rendition, being related to extradition, lies within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Federal High Court. This is what informed my decision to initiate the suit before the Federal High Court.

“To be sure, the extraordinary rendition of Nnamdi Kanu triggered myriad legal questions that cut across multiple jurisdictions. In other words, the rendition has expanded the matter of Kanu far beyond the realms of the Abuja trial and opened up new legal frontiers that must be ventilated to the hilt before other courts and tribunals within and without Nigeria.

“Thus, this very case before the Federal High Court, Umuahia is one of such that is aimed at seeking a definitive judicial pronouncement on the constitutionality of the extraordinary rendition. The ones in the United Kingdom, Kenya, African Union and the United Nations are in addition.”

Ejimakor made the following demands  on behalf of Kanu: “A DECLARATION that the arrest of the Applicant in Kenya by the Respondents’ agents without due process of law is arbitrary, and the Respondents’ enforced disappearance of the Applicant for eight (8) days and their refusal to produce the Applicant before a Kenyan Court for the purpose of Applicant’s extradition is illegal, unlawful, unconstitutional and amount to infringement of the Applicant’s fundamental right against arbitrary arrest, to his personal liberty and to fair hearing as enshrined and guaranteed under the pertinent provisions of CFRN and the Charter.

“A DECLARATION that the detention of the Applicant in a non-official secret facility in Kenya and the torture of the Applicant in Kenya by the Respondents’ agents is illegal, unlawful, unconstitutional and amount to infringement of the Applicant’s fundamental right against unlawful detention, torture and to fair hearing, as enshrined and guaranteed under the pertinent provisions of CFRN and the Charter).

“AN ORDER mandating and compelling the Respondents to pay the sum of N25,000,000,000.00 (Twenty-Five Billion Naira) to the Applicant, being monetary damages claimed by the Applicant against the Respondents jointly and severally for the physical, mental, emotional, psychological, property and other damages suffered by the Applicant as a result of the infringements of Applicant’s fundamental rights by the Respondents”.

An Umuahia resident, Ibe Onuekwusi submitted that the demands of Kanu through his lawyer were very much in order as they followed through the line of due process, noting that Kanu’s arrest did not follow the normal legal applications known to international laws.

“I can tell you that the demand of Mazi Nnamdi Kanu through his lawyer in demanding for compensation is very much in order. I will not be surprised if the court grants it. Two, I am very much aware that Kanu’s arrest and eventual extraordinary rendition did not follow the standard international practices”.

As it turned out, the federal court in Umuahia granted Kanu’s pleas.

Within this period also, the United Nations Organization, issued an ultimatum to the Federal Government of Nigeria, demanding that Kanu should be let off the hook within six months.

As if those were not enough of the finest moments for Nnamdi Kanu in his long walk for freedom, the Federal Court of Appeal in Abuja on October 13, 2022 discharged and acquitted the Biafra evangelist of all charges levelled against him by the Buhari administration.

While Kanu’s family members, associates, followers and supporters were celebrating his release by the Court of Appeal, the Federal Executive Council (FEC), a day after the judgement, met in Abuja and agreed that it would not abide by the verdict. The FEC sat and decided that Kanu must not be freed. The president and his cabinet resolved to appeal the verdict and headed to the Supreme Court.

It turned out that rather than allow Kanu to go home based on status quo ante, the Buhari administration applied for stay of execution. This, really provoked negative reactions from Kanu’s supporters as they threatened that the 2023 general elections would not hold in the South East if the former Radio Biafra director was not released.

Taken together, Ohaneze Ndigbo and other Igbo leaders advised the Federal Government to adopt a political option in solving the Kanu quagmire.

However, the Buhari administration filed fresh seven amended charges against Kanu as it headed to appeal his release by the court of appeal. Investigation revealed that the amended charge was marked FHC/ABJ/CR/383/2015, and contained  all allegations against the IPOB leader that were earlier sustained by the trial court.
According to an account, “FG, specifically alleged that Kanu who is currently in custody of the Department of State Service, DSS, had as a member of an unlawful group, in a broadcast that was received and heard across Nigeria, issued a deadly threat that anyone who flouted his sit-at home order in the South Eastern part of the country, should write his or her will.

“It told the court that as a result of the threat; Banks, Schools, Markets, Shopping Malls, Fuel Stations domiciled in the Eastern States of Nigeria, have continued to shut down their businesses, with citizens and vehicular movements grounded.

“FG further alleged that the IPOB leader had on diverse dates between 2018 and 2021, made broadcasts that were received and heard in Nigeria, inciting members of the public to hunt and kill Nigerian security personnel and their family members, thereby committing an offence punishable under Section 1 (2) (h) of the Terrorism Prevention Amendment Act, 2013.

“More so, it alleged that Kanu directed members of the IPOB “to manufacture Bombs”, adding that the defendant had between the month of March and April 2015, “Imported into Nigeria and kept in Ubulisiuzor in Ihiala Local Government Area of Anambra State within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court, a Radio Transmitter known as Tram 50L concealed in a container of used household items which you declared as used household items, and you thereby committed an offence contrary to section 47 (2) (a) of Criminal Code Act Cap, C45 Laws of the Federation of Nigeria 2004”.

According to an IPOB supporter who did not want his identity to be in the public sphere, “The Buhari administration does not want to allow our leader, Mazi Nnamdi Kanu, to go home. This is too bad and we are not happy about it”.