The American Veterans of Igbo Descent (AVID) has again demanded the discontinuation of the ongoing trial of Mazi Nnamdi Kanu before Justice James Omotosho in a Federal High Court Abuja.
In a statement signed by its President, Chief Sylvester Onyia, AVID expressed “grave concern and total condemnation” of the ongoing trial, describing it as “travesty of justice”.
The issue of jurisdiction and relevant law for prosecution have continued to dog Kanu’s trial, with the IPOB leader insisting that he has no case to answer and that no court in Nigeria has jurisdiction to try him.
However, Justice Omotosho has refused to budge and has even given the IPOB leader up to Friday November 7 to enter his own defence or forfeit it.
But AVID faulted Omotosho’s insistence to proceed with the trial even when the law under which Kanu is being triad has not been established, adding that “trial without law is a trial without legitimacy”.
“Nigeria’s 1999 Constitution (as amended) is clear under Section 36(12) no person shall be tried for any criminal offence unless that offence and its penalty are defined in a written law.
“This is a non derogable constitutional safeguard, a cornerstone of due process, and a measure of any civilized nation’s commitment to justice,” AVID said.
The veterans wondered why the Federal Government still “persists persists in trying Mazi Nnamdi Kanu under a dead law — the Terrorism (Prevention) (Amendment) Act, 2013 — which ceased to exist upon the enactment of the Terrorism (Prevention and Prohibition) Act, 2022”.
The group regretted that “Justice Omotosho, contrary to the mandatory duty of judicial notice under Section 122(2)(a) of the Evidence Act, has refused to acknowledge the repeal” of the Terrorism (Prevention) (Amendment) Act, 2013 .
“This is not a mere oversight; it is a judicial dereliction of constitutional duty,” AVID stated.
On the issue of jurisdiction, the Veterans decried Justice Omotosho’s “posture of ‘wait till judgment’ on questions of jurisdiction, double jeopardy, and validity of charge is the opposite of established precedents of the Supreme Court of Nigeria”.
According to the group “the jurisdictional defects strike at the root of a case and must be determined forthwith, not deferred. No court, no matter how highly placed, can arrogate to itself jurisdiction it does not possess”.
It pointed out that Section 76(1)(d)(i11) of the Terrorism (Prevention and Prohibition) Act, 2022, demands that for any alleged terrorism committed abroad, such act must equally constitute an offence in the jurisdiction of the alleged occurrence — in this case, Kenya, where Mazi Kanu was abducted.
“This double criminality requirement has not been met, yet the judge insists on proceeding, thus nullifying the moral and legal foundation of the entire trial,” AVID said, adding that “when jurisdiction is in question, justice must wait”.
The Florida, United States based organisation lashed out at Nigeria’s judicial institutions, regulatory, and professional bodies for allowing themselves to be “compromised by fear and silence” in the face of obvious travesty of justice.
“It is appalling that in the face of such manifest constitutional infidelity, Nigeria’s legal institutions — the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA), the National Judicial Council (NJC), and so-called legal analysts — have chosen cowardly silence.
“A nation whose lawyers fear to ask, ‘under what law is this man being tried?’ has surrendered its conscience to tyranny,” AVID stated.
Citing Kanu’s “denial of access to lawyers and family in DSS custody, and the judicial disregard of documentary evidence before the court”, AVID noted that “every element of fair hearing — as guaranteed under Section 36(1) of the Constitution — has been destroyed in Justice Omotosho’s court”.
AVID lauded Kanu for his courage amidst the defeaning silence of a nation, noting that his trial has continued to expose the inherent weaknesses in Nigeria’s institutions that should normally protect justice and the rule of law.
“When Mazi Nnamdi Kanu, in court, asked for a five minute recess in the judge’s chambers to prevent the judiciary’s embarrassment, he was rebuffed.
“When he raised the profound constitutional question — “Under what law am I being tried?” —Justice Omotosho retorted, ‘Wait till judgment’.
“That a sitting Federal High Court judge can preside over a criminal trial without identifying a subsisting law is the ultimate indictment of Nigera’s judicial decay,” the Veterans said.
The American Veterans of Igbo Descent therefore called on the international community and organisations including the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC), the U.S Department of State, the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights, and the International Criminal Court (ICC) “to closely monitor and document the ongoing judicial abuses in Nigeria”.
“The trial of Mazi Nnamdi Kanu, in its present form, is not just a constitutional aberration but an affront to international human rights standards on fair trial and rule of law,” AVID stated.
The group challenged Nigerian authorities to “choose between law and lawlessness” by obeying the nation’s Constitution and laws pertaining to the justice system.
“Justice Omotosho’s courtroom has become a theatre of constitutional absurdity — a place where a man is asked to defend himself against a non-existent law, where judicial notice is optional, and where constitutional provisions are treated as irritants. This is not justice; it is judicial tyranny.
“If Nigeria still claims to be a constitutional democracy, it must immediately halt this charade, restore the rule of law, and release Mazi Nnamdi Kanu unconditionally,” AVID stated.
