The American Military Veterans of Igbo Descent (AVID) has called for the unconditional release of the detained leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Mazi Nnamdi Kanu, who has been in the custody of the Department of State Services (DSS).

The group made the demand in a letter dated 26th February 2025, titled ‘OPEN LETTER TO THE PRESIDENT AND GOVERNMENT OF NIGERIA,” addressed to President Bola Tinubu and signed by Chief Dr. Sylvester Onyia and Dr. Godson Obiagwu, President and Secretary, respectively.

The veterans noted that the matter had transformed from a legal or judicial issue to a political one and that it is within the executive province and prerogatives of the President to order his immediate release.

The letter recalled the pronouncement made by the Federal High Court on 26th October 2022, which held that “the manner of arrest and detention of Kanu in Kenya, his continued detention in Abuja, his subjection to physical and mental trauma by the Respondents, and the inhuman and degrading treatment meted out to Kanu amount to a brazen violation of his fundamental right to dignity of his person and a threat to life under Section 34 (1)(a) of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended).”

The letter read in part: “By the plain interpretation of this judicial pronouncement, the further detention of Mr. Kanu after the issuance of this judgment has become arbitrary because the Government of Nigeria has a binding obligation to free him by virtue of the provisions of Section 287(3) of the Nigerian Constitution, which states that:

‘The decisions of the Federal High Court, a High Court, and all other courts established by this Constitution shall be enforced in any part of the Federation by all authorities and persons, and by other courts of law with subordinate jurisdiction to that of the Federal High Court, a High Court, and those other courts, respectively.’

“To be sure, the Government of Nigeria does not need any further judicial process or court order to implement this decision of the Federal High Court

“In December 2023, the Supreme Court of Nigeria, despite its remission of Mr. Kanu’s case to Nigeria’s Federal High Court for trial, decided against his initial detention, stating, inter alia, that:

‘The respondent (Mr. Kanu) was on bail and therefore in the custody of the law when his home was illegally invaded by heavily armed military officers of the appellant (Federal Republic of Nigeria), causing him to flee from his home and the country to secure his life.

“In the face of such an attack, it was responsible for him to flee to secure his life and physical well-being. That is what any normal and reasonable human being would do in that circumstance to preserve his life and physical well-being. It is glaring that the consequences of that attack were intended or foreseeable. This is not arguable.

“The appellant’s officials knew that their invasion of the respondent’s home caused him to run away to secure his life and physical well-being.

“Yet, during proceedings in the pending criminal case against him, they applied that his bail be revoked, that a warrant for his arrest be issued, that his sureties forfeit their respective bail bonds, and that his trial in his absence be ordered because he had jumped bail and was not in court to stand trial.

“But they knew that their illegal actions made it impossible for the respondent to be in court for his trial.

“In a situation such as this, where the prosecution has taken extrajudicial actions against the defendant in a pending criminal case and made it impossible for the defendant, who is on bail, to be in court for trial, it is wrong to treat such a defendant as having jumped bail in the sense that he is running from prosecution or running to avoid prosecution in the pending criminal case in respect of which he was granted bail.

“The respondent did not intentionally and knowingly fail to appear in court. It was, therefore, wrong and malicious for the appellant, who had caused the respondent to flee from his home and country to secure his life, to inform and thereby deceive the trial court that the respondent had jumped bail.

“On the basis of this deception, the appellant applied to the trial court for an order revoking the respondent’s bail, forfeiting the amount securing the bail bond of his sureties, and issuing a bench warrant for his arrest.

“It is glaring from the record of the proceedings in the trial court that it granted the said orders prayed for by the appellant with knowledge of the fact that the respondent’s absence from court was caused by the invasion of his home by army officers of the appellant.

“Therefore, the trial court knew that the said extrajudicial and illegal actions of the appellant made it impossible for the respondent to be in court for trial, that the respondent’s absence was not intentional or deliberate, and that the respondent was not running from prosecution or running to avoid prosecution.

“In light of the foregoing, the trial court acted unfairly and without rational and legally justifiable basis by its decisions revoking the respondent’s bail, forfeiting the amount securing the bail bond of his sureties, and ordering a bench warrant for his arrest.

“The orders were made on the false assumption that the respondent jumped bail. It was on the basis of the order of arrest of the respondent, obtained under the false pretense that he jumped bail, that his extradition or rendition from Kenya was carried out.’**

“On 19th January 2022, the High Court of Abia consequently rendered a judgment in favor of MAZI NNAMDI KANU, stating that:

‘The issue of the military invasion of [MAZI NNAMDI KANU’s] residential abode and premises at Isiama Afaraukwu Ibeku, Abia State, on 10th September 2017 by agents of [GOVERNMENT OF NIGERIA] is so notorious and common knowledge that this Honorable Court cannot turn a blind eye to it.

“I am satisfied that [MAZI NNAMDI KANU] has proved the violation of his fundamental rights to dignity of human person, personal liberty, and attempted violation of his right to life by [GOVERNMENT OF NIGERIA] and/or its agents, and none of the Respondents in this suit has shown any real justification for such conduct.

READ ALSO:DSS allegedly bars lawyer, family from visiting Nnamdi Kanu

“It is the view of this Honorable Court that the agents of the [GOVERNMENT OF NIGERIA] set out as pythons to terminate the life of [MAZI NNAMDI KANU].

“In view of the foregoing, [MAZI NNAMDI KANU’s] Relief 1 and 7 succeed, and it is hereby granted as prayed. The Applicant deserves an apology as prayed.’

“In its wisdom, the Court also stated that:

‘The [GOVERNMENT OF NIGERIA] is urged to show commitment to a peaceful resolution to the matter.’

“On the strength of the foregoing, we hereby strongly urge the Government of Nigeria, headed by His Excellency, President Ahmed Bola Tinubu, to, without further ado, direct that MAZI NNAMDI KANU be released, either on the restoration of his unlawfully revoked bail or on a constitutional discontinuance of his prosecution.

“Suffice it to say that there is no gainsaying that this matter has transformed from a legal or judicial issue to a political one, which is within the executive province and prerogatives of President Tinubu. And as the saying goes, the buck stops at the President’s table.

“While thanking you for your anticipated sound discretion in halting this grave injustice, please permit us to also assure you of our abiding regard for your high office.”