The family of the detained leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra, Nnamdi Kanu, has strongly rejected the judgment delivered by Justice James Omotosho of the Federal High Court in Abuja, describing the decision as one that “raises deep constitutional concerns.”
In a statement signed by Emmanuel Kanu on behalf of the Okwu Kanu family, the family said it was speaking “with heavy hearts but absolute clarity” as it responded to the court’s decision that imposed life imprisonment on the IPOB leader.
According to the statement, “we raised several legal points in court, including Section 36(12) of the Constitution, Supreme Court decisions on repealed laws, and previous directives related to earlier charges.”
The family stressed that their objections were grounded on constitutional protections, adding, “No person shall be convicted unless the offence is defined in a written law in force at the time.” They argued that this principle had been repeatedly upheld in previous rulings of the supreme court.
The statement noted concerns about the court’s interpretation of transition or savings clauses in the law. “We have concerns about the application of transition or savings clauses and how they relate to this case,” it said.
The family insisted that such clauses did not apply because, in their view, “Mazi Nnamdi Kanu’s matter was not pending.”
They added, “The Court of Appeal discharged and acquitted him. That decision terminated all charges.”
According to them, the fresh charges before Justice Omotosho amounted to “a new case, commencing de novo.”
Reinforcing its position on constitutional safeguards, the family said, “A case that was terminated cannot be ‘saved’ by a transition clause.”
They also raised concerns over the violation of fundamental rights, arguing that “the right to be tried only under laws in force, to be informed of the exact charges, and not to be convicted under repealed or non-existent laws cannot be overridden.”
The family further underscored the supremacy of the Constitution by stating, “No transition clause can override Section 36. No statute can override the Constitution. No judge can override the Supreme Court.”
It called for strict adherence to due process and existing laws. “All proceedings should align with existing laws and procedures,” the statement concluded.
The Federal High Court had earlier convicted Kanu on all seven counts of terrorism offences, delivering a life imprisonment sentence on counts one, two, four, five, and six. The court also imposed a 20-year jail term on count three and a five-year term on count seven, both without an option of fine.
Justice Omotosho, who presided over the case at the Federal High Court Abuja, opted for life imprisonment instead of the death penalty on the major counts.
The judgment marks one of the most consequential decisions in the long-running legal battle between the federal government and the IPOB leader, whose arrest in 2021 and subsequent detention have continued to stir political and legal debates across the country.
