Nnamdi Kanu Challenges Nigerian Court’s Jurisdiction in New Legal Move

Nnamdi Kanu, the detained leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), has filed a preliminary objection at the Federal High Court in Abuja, challenging the court’s authority to try him. Kanu’s legal team, led by Barrister Aloy Ejimakor, argues that the charges against him are unconstitutional under several sections of the Nigerian Constitution, including Sections 1(3), 6(6), 12, 36(2), 36(8), 42, 45, and 251(1)(q).

Kanu contends that the court lacks jurisdiction over counts 1, 2, 4, 5, and 8 of the charges. He asserts that the Terrorism Prevention Amendment Act 2013, which led to IPOB’s proscription and its designation as a terrorist group without allowing him an opportunity to contest the order, is inconsistent with the Constitution.

Kanu’s legal team cited Section 36(2) of the Constitution, emphasizing that any law affecting civil rights must allow for representation before a decision is made, and cannot make such decisions final and conclusive.

The preliminary objection follows a recent ruling by Justice Binta Nyako, who denied Kanu’s request for bail reinstatement and house arrest. Despite a Supreme Court ruling in 2023 stating Kanu did not jump bail, Justice Nyako found that Kanu had indeed fled Nigeria, discharging his sureties as they could not locate him.

Kanu’s legal team also noted existing international tribunal decisions against his arrest and trial, arguing these should bind Nigerian courts. They maintain that some of the laws under which Kanu is being tried have been repealed, and several charges are defective due to lack of specific details.

Kanu has called the government’s attempt to try him a violation of the Terrorism Prevention and Prohibition Act, labeling it as an act of terrorism itself. The court has yet to respond to the preliminary objection.