• Court dismisses claim that new judge stepped down
The detained leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Nnamdi Kanu, has maintained that IPOB is neither an unlawful organisation nor a terrorist group.

In a statement issued yesterday through his legal team led by his Special Counsel, Aloy Ejimakor, the IPOB leader accused the Nigerian government of sidestepping a 2016 Federal High Court judgment that declared that IPOB is not a terrorist group or unlawful organisation.

Ejimakor emphasised that the treason and treasonable felony charges initially brought against Kanu were all struck out on October 14, 2021, at the behest of the Nigerian Government due to the absence of any evidence to sustain them.

He stated that despite enduring an 18-month detention and six years of trial on these charges, the Nigerian Government pivoted to new terrorism-related allegations following Kanu’s extraordinary rendition from Kenya.

Ejimakor described this shift from treason to terrorism as a dubious move by the Federal Government aimed at shifting the goalpost and prolonging Kanu’s detention.
He noted that under Section 41 of the Criminal Code, treason requires proof of an intent to overthrow the state, a high threshold that was previously tied to Kanu’s pre-2017 self-determination activities.

He noted that following Kanu’s controversial 2021 abduction, the Nigerian Government reframed the case around terrorism, citing IPOB’s 2017 proscription by the then Attorney-General, Abubakar Malami, and the late Justice Kafarati.

According to him, the move was designed to criminalise Kanu’s post-2017 broadcasts and leadership, despite self-determination being a right protected under Article 20 of the African Charter, which was enacted by the National Assembly in 1983.

Ejimakor further stressed that Kanu was not arrested in Kenya but was instead abducted in what the Nigerian Supreme Court—per Justice Emmanuel Agim—condemned as a “criminal abduction” and an act of “executive lawlessness.”

He compared the manner of Kanu’s rendition to the tactics used by kidnappers to seize their victims.

“The Supreme Court also acknowledged the egregious violations of international law & norms (e.g., extradition treaties) and Nigerian law (e.g., fair hearing and due process), consistent with the United Nations (UN) Working Group opinion in July 2022, calling Kanu’s detention arbi trary,” Ejimakor stated.

MEANWHILE, the Federal High Court (FHC) has said reports that the new judge assigned to adjudicate on the case against Kanu has stepped down is false and misleading.
In the report titled, “New Judge Steps Down from Nnamdi Kanu’s Case, Says His Arrest Was Wrong,” it was alleged that Justice John Tsoho, who is the Chief Judge (CJ) of FHC, is the new judge.

The report reads in part: “Justice John Tsoho, the new judge assigned to Nnamdi Kanu’s case, has quit.

“He said Kanu was brought back to Nigeria from Kenya illegally, and because of that, he can’t judge the case without going against his own beliefs.”

However, the FHC, in a statement signed by the Chief Registrar, Sulaiman Hassan, said the claim was “entirely unfounded, fictitious, grossly mischievous, damaging in intent and should be disregarded in its entirety.