Nnamdi Kanu’s Family Disputes Court Ruling, Points to Legal Irregularities.

The family of jailed Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) leader Nnamdi Kanu has rejected the recent judgment delivered by Justice James Omotosho of the Federal High Court, Abuja.

In a statement issued on Monday and signed by Emmanuel Kanu on behalf of the Okwu Kanu family, they said they were speaking “with heavy hearts but absolute clarity” regarding the court’s decision.

The family noted that “we raised several legal points in court, including Section 36(12) of the Constitution, Supreme Court decisions on repealed laws, and previous directives related to earlier charges.”

They emphasised the importance of constitutional safeguards, stating, “No person shall be convicted unless the offence is defined in a written law in force at the time,” citing previous Supreme Court rulings that uphold this principle. They also expressed concerns about the legal reasoning in the ruling, particularly regarding the use of transition or savings clauses.

According to the family, such clauses may not apply in Kanu’s case because “Mazi Nnamdi Kanu’s matter was not pending.” They noted that the Court of Appeal had previously discharged and acquitted him, which, in their view, terminated all charges. The subsequent case before Justice Omotosho, they argued, constituted “a new case, commencing de novo,” and could not be “saved” by a transition clause.

The family further highlighted constitutional protections under Section 36, stressing 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“the right to be tried only under laws in force, to be informed of the exact charges, and not to be convicted under repealed or non-existent laws cannot be overridden.” They added, “No transition clause can override Section 36. No statute can override the Constitution. No judge can override the Supreme Court.”

The statement concluded with a call for strict adherence to the Constitution and established legal procedures, noting, “All proceedings should align with existing laws and procedures.”

Justice Omotosho had sentenced Kanu to life imprisonment on counts one, two, four, five, and six, opting for life imprisonment rather than the death penalty. He was also given a 20-year jail term on count three and a five-year term on count seven, both without the option of fines, after being convicted on all seven counts of terrorism offences.