Mazi Nnamdi Kanu who has been in prison for the better part of the last 10 years is the face of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB). He was not the founder. He was at the head of the internal rebellion and the subsequent insurgency that ousted the promoters of IPOB and its handmaiden, the once ubiquitous new Radio Biafra. This radio station stirs deep love, and equally deep hatred and loathing from various sections of a deeply divided Nigeria. Among Igbo youngsters, and they constitute the majority of that nation’s population, as in other population segments in Africa, Radio Biafra was a must listen to. It enjoyed a global reach and so a global followership. At the height of its prowling prowess it was not unusual to hear the majority of passengers inside inter-state commercial buses from the East insisting on the vehicle driver tuning into Radio Biafra for the duration of the trip. I am a witness on occasions when I had a need to travel by that means. On the flip side, haters of Radio Biafra were legion and equally filled with unspeakable bile. The contents of its programming were venomous, hate-filled, irreverent, trenchant and pugilistic. Kanu was a propagandist, and he knew it. Whenever he was on duty and behind the console, the world stopped among youngsters of the Igbo nation wherever they may be in the universe. Nigeria’s former president and affliction, Maj-Gen Muhammadu Buhari, and his co-travelers in that ancient regime could have feigned to be unfazed by the name-calling and two-fisted and relentless attacks on them by Kanu and Radio Biafra, but the truth was that they were unsettled and irritated. At one point, Buhari’s attorney general filed a suit in court against Kanu which key charge was insulting the president. Some lawyers contended then that there was no such crime in our books.
Just like Buhari before him, the regime of Alhaji Bola Ahmed Tinubu, is using Mazi Nnamdi Kanu as a pawn in their political chessboard. The intention is to use him for quid pro quo ahead of the 2027 election. Tinubu obviously does not understand the make up of a typical Igbo person. Using Kanu as a bargaining chip will not win him any significant support in the Igbo nation when the time comes. He may have a better chance of making inroads in the hearts and minds of the Igbo if he immediately directed his attorney general and minister of justice to file a nolle prosequi as it concerns the torture and trial of Kanu.
So in a span of one decade Kanu has managed to be the leader of a separatist group, a serial defendant in court cases, eternal accused person, head of a terrorist organisation, sponsor of a violent militia, a detainee, a prisoner, an escapee from a violent and bloody invasion of his father’s compound near Umuahia in Abia state, a man determined by a superior court of having no case to answer, a fugitive from the law, among other labels. The current status of Nnamdi Kanu is that of a man serving prison term for an indeterminate period or sine die without being formally convicted by a court of law for any known crime. Early this month a federal high court in Abuja had ordered that he should be hauled before the court on Monday, February 10. If there was a reason for the sudden arraignment, it was not in the public domain. If it was stated then yours sincerely missed it. The curious thing was that the judge before whom Kanu would appear was his ‘customer’. In local parlance a customer is someone you see often and conduct business with. The name of this federal high court judge is Binta Fatimat Remawa Nyako. She is the wife of a retired Navy General, Rear Admiral Murtala Nyako. In a sense Justice Nyako, and the accused/defendant Kanu are customers after Kanu had gotten a prior trial judge recused from his lingering and obviously interminable ‘trial’. Properly speaking, Nnamdi Kanu is not facing prosecution; he’s being persecuted. He is a prisoner of conscience. Even his persecutors know this as an unvarnished truth.
As it turned out February 10 was for the resumption of the trial of Kanu on terrorism and other related trumped up charges against him by the federal government. But it wasn’t to be. Justice Nyako was supposed to be seated on her throne. In reality she sat on the throne. The government lawyer, Adegboyega Awomolo was supposed to sit in the front row because of his status as a senior advocate of Nigeria. And he was there. Kanu, the accused/defendant, was as expected in the dock. Ideally, the contestations over fine legal points should be between the prosecuting and defence teams. The judge moderates and holds court, pun intended. It was not to be. It turned out to be a circus and a spectacle soon after the so-called trial got underway. For anyone not used to the Nigerian court system it would have been easy to conclude that the judge and the prosecutor were the persons on trial, the persons in the dock. Kanu did not fight shy in taking over his own defence from his lawyers. He vociferously made accusations, insinuations and inferences that were in no way complimentary to the judge and the lead prosecutor. He alluded to bias, ethical misconduct, abuse of law, corruption, and outright monetary inducements in hundreds of millions of Naira.
PLEASE SEE: Education: name, policy not Nigeria’s problem
There were viral videos on the altercations in court on that fateful, really disgraceful day. A national newspaper later captured what transpired after first reporting that the suit had been adjourned indefinitely: Earlier in January Kanu (had) filed a petition against Justice Nyako before the national judicial council wherein he accused her of judicial misconduct over his trial. And days later, the IPOB leader called for his case to be transferred to the south east if no judge at the federal high court in Abuja was willing to preside over it apart from Justice Nyako. At what was supposed to be the commencement of proceedings, prosecutor Awomolo had stated that he had filed and served all necessary documents and so was ready. But defence attorney, Aloy Ejimakor, said that the issue before the court was not about proceeding with the trial. At that point Justice Nyako intervened to explain that though she had earlier recused herself from the case, the chief judge of the federal high court had turned down her decision to withdraw from the case. Subsequently she directed that the defendant should file a formal motion with the chief judge requesting the reassignment of the case to another judge. That was a curious demand by Nyako.
While the opposing lawyers were haggling about the propriety of a motion for reassignment, Kanu obtained leave of the court to speak for himself on the matter. “Yes, I want to take over”, Kanu responded to a question from Nyako. Kanu then said that he agreed to attend court out of respect for the judiciary. He insisted that Justice Nyako no longer had jurisdiction over his trial, as she had previously recused herself in September of 2024. He turned to the lead prosecutor and said, “a grown up man like you who should be in the village and, who should be making sure that things are done properly, is here subverting the law”. Turning his gaze to the judge, Kanu said he no longer recognised the authority of her court. “Everything you (the judge) said here is meaningless to me. Why is it that when it comes to my case, everything is turned upside-down?” The defendant argued that the memo sent by the chief judge, returning the case file to Justice Nyako, could not override the enrolled order made on September 24, when she initially recused herself”. When Justice Nyako informed Kanu that he was at liberty to appeal the chief judge’s decision, the defendant shot back saying that” if the chief judge disagrees, he should appeal the (recusal) decision” to a superior court. It soon became a monologue with Kanu saying: ”You (Nyako) cannot preside over this case, not now, not today, not ever. You stand recused and you must leave my case. I don’t need you in my case. You are biased. Tell the chief judge that Nnamdi Kanu said so. This is not a court of law. This is a shrine to injustice, and I will not subject myself to it “. Kanu also shot down an attempt by the prosecutor to get Justice Nyako to fix a trial date. “Because of money they are paying you from the AGF’s (attorney general of the federation’s) office, a grown up man like you is here supporting evil. The rule of law says you should go on appeal. The same chief judge, writing this stupid memo, I have recused him before. He sat on an appeal, I took him to NJC, and recused him. Why is he insisting on this one? He wants to embarrass your lordship by asking her to sit on this case“. Apparently flustered, Justice Nyako said: “The only decision I can make right now is that in the light of what is happening now in court, I am going to adjourn this case sine die. But Kanu told the judge that she had no jurisdiction to adjourn anything. “None whatsoever. You cannot make an order without jurisdiction. The memo from the chief judge cannot confer jurisdiction upon you”.
SEE ALSO: IF KEMI BADENOCH WERE IGBO
It’s very clear from the so-called trial of Kanu that his persecutors are determined to use politics to blunt and trump law. The federal government has no case against Mazi Nnamdi Kanu except attempting to suppress free speech which is a constitutional right. Assuming, but without conceding, that any charges could be sustained against him, those charges were vitiated by the singular terrorist act of the Buhari regime in abducting Kanu from Kenya and his extraordinary rendition to Nigeria. The Abuja division of the Nigerian Court of Appeal said as much in October 2023. The second highest court in the land had voided all the charges preferred against him. The three-man panel of justices was unanimous in ruling that the government breached local and international treaties to unlawfully arrest and detain Kanu. In discharging and acquitting Kanu when the case was taken off Nyako, one of the panelists, Justice Oludotun Adefope-Okojie, said that the authorities failed to publicly disclose where they arrested Kanu and therefore could not proceed with his trial. “No government is permitted to abduct anybody without following due process of extradition. Nigeria is not an exception”. However, the federal government got the Supreme Court to overrule the Appeal Court decision and return the case file to Nyako’s court for trial. Curiously, the Supreme Court had no publicly stated opinion on the abduction and extraordinary rendition of the victim of the state-sponsored terrorism. Even then it took weeks before the apex court released the formal judgement. Because Kanu was involved the court breached the regulation that stipulated a maximum of seven days. Elsewhere rapporteurs of a United Nations agency that probed Kanu’s abduction and trial had also come to the same conclusion that the government behaved like a rogue state. The demanded that Kanu should be freed and compensated for the trauma he might have suffered on account of his abduction, an extraordinary rendition to Nigeria, and illegal imprisonment.
PLEASE READ: Maximum government and minimum governance
Just like Buhari before him, the regime of Alhaji Bola Ahmed Tinubu, is using Mazi Nnamdi Kanu as a pawn in their political chessboard. The intention is to use him for quid pro quo ahead of the 2027 election. Tinubu obviously does not understand the make up of a typical Igbo person. Using Kanu as a bargaining chip will not win him any significant support in the Igbo nation when the time comes. He may have a better chance of making inroads in the hearts and minds of the Igbo if he immediately directed his attorney general and minister of justice to file a nolle prosequi as it concerns the torture and trial of Kanu. The sentiment even amongst those who are not sold to Kanu’s methods is that Tinubu has inherited and perpetuated the humiliation and trial of the Igbo nation for their lack of support for, and indeed outright rejection of him during the presidential election of 2023, just like his predecessor Buhari. There’s an idiomatic expression about the law being an ass. This is often interpreted to mean that the law can be unreasonable, stupid, inflexible, unjust, illogical or harsh. The expression could also imply that the law may not always align with common sense or moral principles. But the law is really not all these. The greater problem is within the range of persons who manipulate the law for ends other than good. In this category you will find corrupt government officials, litigants, witnesses, lawyers, judges and sundry participants in the judicial process. So let Tinubu, like Buhari, continue to treat the law as an ass because it suits his mean and duplicitous fancies and proclivities.
