An Abuja-based legal practitioner, Onyedikachi Ifedi has again canvassed for upholding of the principle of natural justice and rule of law in the trial of the Biafra nation agitator, Nnamdi Kanu on terrorism charges by the federal government.
The lawyer insisted that the Supreme Court’s judgment of December 15, 2023 being used to prosecute Kanu is a catastrophic failure of judicial duty.
In a statement issued on Saturday, the lawyer pleaded with the Nigerian Bar Association, NBA; Senior Advocates of Nigeria, civil rights groups and the media to point out the grave dangers in the apex court’s judgment with a view to getting it reversed.
His grouse was that the Supreme Court verdict validated breach of international laws, including African Charters on human and people rights as well as setting a bad precedent for the nation.
The statement reads in part: “The case of Mazi Nnamdi Kanu has become the ultimate test for Nigeria’s commitment, or lack of, to the Rule of Law and obedience to its Constitution.
“The Supreme Court’s judgment of December 15, 2023, which condoned the Federal Government’s kidnapping of Mazi Kanu from Kenya and allowed his trial to proceed, represents a dangerous departure from precedent and rule of law to the rule of judicial tyranny.
“The Supreme Court judgment is a legal nullity—per incuriam (rendered in ignorance of binding law)—and therefore worthless.
“It sought to reduce the Constitution’s most sacred guarantees to mere suggestions. This is not about Mazi Nnamdi Kanu’s guilt or innocence; it is about whether the Supreme Court is allowed to use their position as the apex court to destroy the foundational law of Nigeria- which is the Constitution, for the sake of one man.
“The government and some legal commentators have falsely framed the issue of Kanu’s kidnapping in Kenya and illegal rendition as a “technicality.”
“This is a profound misrepresentation. The principle of nullity is the law’s strongest tool to punish state impunity and protect every citizen from tyranny.
“What is Nullity? It is a legal declaration that a proceeding is void from the very beginning. It is not a minor procedural slip; it is the consequence of a breach so fundamental that it robs the entire process of its legitimacy.
“Why Does it Apply Here? The government did not simply arrest Nnamdi Kanu illegally within Nigeria as it did in 2015. It orchestrated an international crime, an extraordinary rendition, involving torture, denial of fair hearing, access to lawyers, and a complete bypass of all extradition treaties and Kenyan courts.
“You cannot build a legitimate trial on such an illegitimate foundation. The doctrine of the “fruit of the poisonous tree” comes into play.
“The Supreme Court’s decision to allow the trial to continue ignored decades of its own binding rulings. This is the definition of a per incuriam judgment.
“In Ariori vs. Elemo (1983): The Supreme Court itself held that “any breach of the rules of natural justice renders the whole proceeding a nullity.” The rendition was a gross breach of natural justice before the trial even began.
“Also, in Adigun vs. A.G. Oyo State (1987): The Court ruled that violating fair hearing is a “fundamental vice” that nullifies everything that follows.
“The Constitution of Nigeria (S.36) & The African Charter (Arts. 6 & 7): These documents guarantee the right to fair hearing and due process. These rights are non-derogable—meaning they can never be suspended, not even in times of war. The government violated them. The Court’s role is to enforce them, not overlook them.
“By choosing to treat this foundational violation as a mere “irregularity,” the Supreme Court made a grave error that threatens the legal protections of every single person in Nigeria.
“The recent landmark judgment from the High Court of Kenya (June 24, 2025) is not just a “new fact”; it is a powerful, independent judicial confirmation of the Nigerian Court of Appeal’s 2022 ruling. Both a Nigerian court and a Kenyan court have now found the same facts.
“The Nigerian government has been found guilty of international law violations by a foreign court. For the Nigerian judiciary to now say that a trial founded on these crimes can still be “fair” is a catastrophic failure of justice and makes a mockery of our nation’s standing in the international community.
“If this judgment stands, it sets a terrifying precedent: The State can Kidnap anyone: Any citizen critical of the government could be abducted from any country, without any legal process, and brought to Nigeria to face trial. Your passport and foreign travel will not protect you.
“The government’s argument that its illegal acts can be “cured” by a fair trial or compensated with damages means that fundamental rights have a price tag. The state can violate your most sacred rights and simply pay a fine afterwards. This commercializes justice and destroys its very essence.
“When the highest court in the land fails to draw a bright line against state-sponsored criminality, it signals that the executive branch is above the law. This erodes the very foundation of our democracy.
“The Nigerian Bar Association (NBA), senior advocates, and human rights lawyers must add their voices to condemn this judgment and support the legal steps to have it reviewed and set aside. The integrity of the entire legal system is at stake.
“The media and civil rights groups must rise to educate the public on the grave implications of this case. This is not about sympathy for Mazi Nnamdi Kanu; it is about defending the Constitution that protects us all.
“The International Community must take note of this breach of international law and its ratification by the Nigerian judiciary. Peer review and diplomatic pressure are crucial to upholding global human rights standards.
“The path to justice is clear. The Supreme Court must review and overturn its own decision. The proceedings against Mazi Nnamdi Kanu must be declared a nullity, and he must be released.
“This is the only outcome that upholds the Constitution, respects international law, and sends an unequivocal message that in Nigeria, the rule of law is supreme—not the whims of the state.
“This is our stand. For the sake of every Nigerian, we must defend the law.”
