‘Why Nigerian Govt will not list Nnamdi Kanu’s appeal’ – Lawyer indicts courts, AGF
A lawyer representing Nnamdi Kanu, the leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), has asserted that the Nigerian government is deliberately delaying the listing of Kanu’s appeal against his conviction. Onyedikachi Ifedi contends that the conviction is legally unsound, thereby prompting the government’s reluctance to proceed with the case.
Reports indicate that the Court of Appeal has yet to schedule a hearing for Kanu’s appeal, which has drawn significant public attention and criticism. The Mazi Nnamdi Kanu Global Legal Consortium, a collective of attorneys advocating for Kanu’s release, has accused the Nigerian government of evading courtroom proceedings, stating that the conviction cannot withstand legal examination.
IPOB has issued a 14-day ultimatum to the government, demanding that the appeal be scheduled for hearing or risk consequences, including a potential boycott of the 2027 elections in the South-East and other regions identified as ‘Biafra territories.’
On Wednesday, Ifedi expressed concerns that the prosecution’s hesitation is rooted in fears of the embarrassment the case may cause to the Nigerian judiciary. “The question is no longer whether Nigeria will defend the conviction of Onyendu Mazi Nnamdi Kanu. The question is why it has decided it cannot afford to,” Ifedi stated.
To support his claims, Ifedi highlighted several points suggesting that the government is avoiding the appeal listing: The Federal Government has not submitted a defense, no court date has been established, and the conviction was based on an outdated law. He characterized the non-listing of the appeal not as a mere delay but as an indication that the judiciary is avoiding scrutiny of its legal decisions.
Ifedi referred to the Court of Appeal’s earlier jurisdiction over Kanu’s case, arguing that its decision to override a previous discharge was unlawful. He criticized the court for substituting a civil stay for a criminal process, thus undermining the integrity of the judicial outcome. He elaborated that the handling of Kanu’s case may involve the Supreme Court and the Federal High Court violating legal standards by convicting Kanu under a statute that no longer exists.
He further accused Attorney General Prince Lateef Fagbemi of neglecting to defend the conviction, allowing time to expire without taking action. Ifedi asserted that the government does not want to list the appeal because Kanu plans to represent himself, effectively removing the opportunity for external intimidation of legal counsel.
According to Ifedi, Kanu has submitted an appellant brief totaling 115 pages, outlining eight distinct constitutional issues for the court’s consideration. He argued that addressing these issues would compel the court to confront the weaknesses in Kanu’s conviction.
Ifedi concluded by expressing concerns about the judiciary’s commitment to protecting its own credibility over serving citizens’ justice. He noted that if the Court of Appeal suppresses the truth concerning Kanu’s case, it risks undermining its authority and credibility within the legal system.
