‘How various courts broke the law in Nnamdi Kanu’s case’ – Lawyer

Lawyer Christopher Chidera has accused multiple courts in Nnamdi Kanu's trial of committing legal violations that led to his guilty verdict and life sentence. Kanu, the leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), is currently incarcerated in Sokoto Prison.

According to Chidera, the courts' illegal actions began when the Court of Appeal discharged Kanu and quashed the charges against him on October 13, 2022. However, the lawyer contends that subsequent legal steps were based on invalid foundations, resulting in an unlawful trial that continued to lead to Kanu's eventual conviction.

Chidera highlights three main court errors: the Court of Appeal's failure to allow the discharge to take effect; the Supreme Court's treatment of the quashed appeal as if it revived the original charges; and the Federal High Court's conviction without identifying the current law that created the offense and penalty. He argues that criminal convictions require a valid charge, a court with jurisdiction, and a law still in force.

Furthermore, Chidera faults the Supreme Court for reviving quashed charges and treating repealed laws as still in force. He explains that while a savings clause may prevent a case from collapsing after a statute is repealed, it does not bring the repealed law back to life. He also criticizes the Supreme Court for handling the Terrorism Act repeal, stating that the new act does not revive the old law.

Chidera concludes by stating that the courts' actions violated Section 122 of the Evidence Act, which requires courts to acknowledge the current law when convicting someone. He argues that the courts ignored this requirement and proceeded as if the repealed act still defined the crime and penalty.