By Muhammad Mamman
Barrister Onyedikachi Ifedi, a member of the defense team for detained Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) leader Nnamdi Kanu, has accused the Nigerian government of orchestrating a “theater of the absurd” to justify Kanu’s continued detention. In a statement titled “The Real Theatre is in Abuja, Not IPOB,” Ifedi dismissed what he called “government-sponsored propaganda” and argued that the Federal Government lacks any legal basis to hold Kanu, branding the case a flagrant violation of Nigerian and international law.
Ifedi’s scathing remarks targeted a recent article in Authority Newspaper, which labeled IPOB’s efforts to secure Kanu’s release as a “theatrical search for acquittal.” He called the piece “political theater” driven by “faceless writers hiding under government mouthpieces” to mislead the public. In a bold counterpoint, Ifedi referenced a Canadian court’s designation of Nigeria’s ruling All Progressives Congress (APC) and opposition Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) as terrorist groups, noting that this ruling came from “a jurisdiction where justice is not for sale.” The Nigerian government has rejected the designation, calling it interference in its internal affairs.
Central to Ifedi’s argument is the illegality of Kanu’s 2021 abduction from Kenya, which he described as “extraordinary rendition” prohibited under both Nigerian and international law. He cited the Court of Appeal’s October 13, 2022, ruling in FRN v. Kanu (CA/ABJ/CR/625/2022), which declared Kanu’s rendition a violation of his fundamental rights and nullified the proceedings. However, Ifedi accused the Supreme Court of “somersaulting” in its December 15, 2023, decision by remitting a case already deemed void, calling it a “violation of centuries of settled law.”
The lawyer further argued that Kanu is being prosecuted under the repealed Terrorism Prevention (Amendment) Act 2013, which was replaced by the Terrorism Prevention and Prohibition Act 2022. “Every count predicated on the 2013 Act is a legal corpse,” Ifedi asserted, citing the Supreme Court’s ruling in FRN v. Ifegwu (2003) that repealed statutes nullify associated offenses. He accused the judiciary of entertaining a fundamentally defective case, labeling it “theater of the absurd.”
Ifedi emphasized that the government has failed to prove essential elements of a criminal case against Kanu. “No victim, no weapon, no violent act has been attributed to Mazi Nnamdi Kanu,” he said, arguing that Kanu’s speeches and broadcasts are protected under Section 39 of Nigeria’s 1999 Constitution and Article 9 of the African Charter. Quoting Nwankwo v. State (1983), he added, “Criminalizing speech is nothing but dictatorship dressed as law.”
The lawyer also warned that any appellate court discharge of Kanu would legally amount to an acquittal, citing cases like Abacha v. State (2002) and Ezeze v. State (2004). He argued that pursuing charges based on a repealed law and an illegal rendition risks exposing Kanu to double jeopardy, a violation of Section 36(9) of the Constitution.
In a final salvo, Ifedi turned the accusation of “theatrics” back on the government. “The real theatrics are a Supreme Court upholding a repealed law, a prosecution that cannot prove guilt, and a government committing international crimes while judging its victim,” he said. Declaring that IPOB is not begging for acquittal but demanding justice, Ifedi concluded, “History, like law, is on IPOB’s side.”
