A member of the legal team defending the detained leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Mazi Nnamdi Kanu, has accused the Federal Government of engaging in “propaganda and political theatre” while lacking legal grounds to continue holding him in custody.
In a strongly worded statement titled “The real theatre is in Abuja, not IPOB: A legal demolition of the ‘theatrical search for Nnamdi Kanu’s acquittal’ propaganda”, Barrister Onyedikachi Ifedi faulted what he described as “faceless government-sponsored writers” seeking to mislead the public.
He condemned a recent article labelling IPOB’s quest for Kanu’s acquittal as “theatrical,” arguing instead that the real theatre is Abuja’s “legal somersaults.”
Ifedi maintained that Kanu’s abduction from Kenya in June 2021 amounted to extraordinary rendition, which is prohibited under both Nigerian and international law. He cited the Court of Appeal judgment in FRN v. Kanu (2022), which nullified the proceedings on grounds of illegality.
“Instead of respecting this binding judgment, the Supreme Court somersaulted in its 15 December 2023 ruling by remitting a case that had already been nullified. That, dear reader, is the real theatre,” Ifedi stated.
He also faulted the government for prosecuting Kanu under the Terrorism Prevention (Amendment) Act 2013, a law repealed by Section 49 of the Terrorism Prevention and Prohibition Act 2022.
“Every count predicated on the repealed law is a legal corpse. Yet the Nigerian judiciary continues to entertain it. That is theatre of the absurd,” he declared, citing Supreme Court precedent that once a statute is repealed, related offences die a natural death.
The lawyer argued further that the government has failed to prove any basic elements of a criminal charge against Kanu.
“No victim. No weapon. No violent act attributed personally to Mazi Nnamdi Kanu. At best, speeches and broadcasts — which are constitutionally protected under Section 39 of the 1999 Constitution,” he said.
He insisted that any appellate discharge of Kanu already translates to an acquittal in law, noting that forcing him to face trial again would amount to double jeopardy, which is forbidden by the Constitution.
Summing up, Ifedi accused the Federal Government of pursuing propaganda instead of justice:
“Theatrics are not in IPOB’s demand for acquittal. The real theatrics are: a Supreme Court that upholds a repealed law, a prosecution that cannot prove actus reus or mens rea, and propaganda outlets hiding under faceless authorship. IPOB is not begging for acquittal; IPOB is demanding justice under the Constitution and international law.”
