Nnamdi Kanu Declares Charges Baseless, Says No Law Supports His Trial And Demands Immediate Release From DSS Custody

 

Detained leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra, Nnamdi Kanu, on Tuesday demanded his unconditional release from the custody of the Department of State Services, DSS, insisting that the terrorism charges filed against him by the Federal Government have no legal foundation. Appearing before the Federal High Court in Abuja, Kanu maintained that there is no valid charge before the court capable of sustaining a trial and therefore argued that he has no case to answer.

The pro-Biafra agitator, who is currently representing himself after disengaging his team of lawyers, refused to open his defence to the seven-count terrorism charge brought against him. He told the trial judge that the Federal Government failed to cite any existing law under which the accusations were made. According to him, the alleged offences are not recognized by any law in force within the country, which automatically nullifies the prosecution’s case.

Kanu urged the presiding judge to take judicial notice of his motion on notice and the accompanying affidavit, where he challenged the jurisdiction of the court to continue hearing a case that, in his view, does not exist under the Nigerian Constitution. He argued that no court can lawfully proceed with a trial based on repealed or non-existent legislation. His submission was anchored on Section 36(12) of the 1999 Constitution, which provides that no person shall be convicted of a criminal offence unless that offence is defined and the penalty prescribed in a written law.

Standing firm on his position, Kanu told the court, “You cannot ask me to begin my defence when you have not stated the law under which I am being charged. The records before this court clearly show there is no law backing these charges. I request to be released. My Lord should take judicial notice of all the documents and motions before the court.”

He further alleged that his ongoing detention and trial constitute a violation of a Supreme Court judgment which, according to him, condemned his extraordinary rendition from Kenya to Nigeria in 2021. When reminded that the apex court had remitted his case for a fresh trial, Kanu argued that proceeding with the case despite the illegality of his rendition and the absence of a valid charge amounted to a constitutional breach and a denial of justice.

The IPOB leader also asserted that the Terrorism Prevention and Prohibition Act under which he is being tried has already been repealed, rendering any prosecution under it invalid. “In Nigeria today, the Constitution remains the supreme law of the land. There is no provision for terrorism offence in the Constitution. There is no valid charge against me. I will not go back to any detention today,” Kanu declared boldly.

He continued, “The law they are quoting has been repealed. I cannot put up any defence under a repealed law. Tell any lawyer to show me the valid charge. I appeal to this court to take judicial notice of the repeal of the terrorism charges. I am not ready to go back to detention today unless I am shown a valid law under which I am being prosecuted.”

The fiery separatist maintained that prosecuting him under a repealed law infringes on his fundamental rights and violates both domestic and international legal principles. His argument, rooted in constitutional supremacy, questioned the integrity of the entire trial process, asserting that any proceedings based on invalid legislation are null and void.

Responding to Kanu’s submissions, the prosecution counsel, Chief Adegboyega Awomolo, SAN, challenged the competence and authenticity of the documents served on him by the defendant. He contended that the papers lacked probative value and should be disregarded by the court. Awomolo insisted that the defence was employing delay tactics to waste the valuable time of the court, urging the judge not to entertain further distractions from the substantive case.

The Federal Government’s lead counsel then asked the court to treat the documents Kanu recently filed as his final written address and to order all parties to adopt their respective written addresses so that judgment could be delivered without further delay.

Observers within the courtroom noted the tense atmosphere as Kanu repeatedly insisted that his detention was unlawful and that he would not cooperate with any proceedings until the court or prosecution presented a valid legal basis for his trial. His remarks once again brought attention to long-standing debates over constitutionalism, the limits of state power, and the controversial nature of his extraordinary rendition.

As proceedings adjourned, it remained unclear whether the court would uphold Kanu’s claim that the charges were legally unsustainable or proceed with the Federal Government’s request for judgment. The case continues to draw both national and international attention, as Kanu’s arguments question the balance between state authority and constitutional rights in Nigeria’s judicial process.