Page Nav


hide author name





Classic Header


Header Ad

Breaking News


Responsived Ad

Umuahia High Court Verdict And Its Effect on the Ongoing Nnamdi Kanu's Case

 Umuahia High Court Verdict And Its Effect on the Ongoing Nnamdi Kanu's Case According to the law, the Abia State High Court in Umuahia,...

 Umuahia High Court Verdict And Its Effect on the Ongoing Nnamdi Kanu's Case

According to the law, the Abia State High Court in Umuahia, like every other state's high courts has the jurisdiction to give hearing to cases that are filed from within her territory. For instance, the military invasion of Mazi Nnamdi Kanu's ancestral home in Afara-ukwu Ibeku, Umuahia happened within the territorial jurisdiction of the Umuahia State High Court. Therefore, there is an equal right for both the Federal and State High Courts in Umuahia to attend to the case because it boarders on matters of Fundamental Rights.

One may argue that since the case is between Federal agencies like Nigeria Department of State Service(DSS), Police and the Military, the Federal High Court should exclusively have the jurisdiction to entertain it. But, at the same time, such a person should as well consider what the documents of the case may contain, regarding the nature of the case and prayers of the applicants against the respondents, including the parties sued as defendants/respondents. It might be under fundamental enforcement procedure rules 2009 or under the administration of criminal  justice law of Abia State or under Abia State High Court civil procedure rules, which also confers jurisdiction on both courts.

Therefore, on the effect of the just passed verdict regarding the Nigeria government's infringement on Mazi Nnamdi Kanu's fundamental human rights, the following subsists and serves as judicial precedent, under the doctrine of "de stare decisis", unless appealled against and the court of appeal rules on the contrary.

They are:

1. The ruling in Abia State High Court, Umuahia is a complete victory for the Indigenous People Of Biafra(IPOB) World-wide who were maliciously tagged a terrorist organisation. 

2. That Mazi Nnamdi Kanu, leader of IPOB is free to continue as such, since IPOB remains a freedom fighting group and not a terrorist organisation.

3. That the stigma of a terrorist organisation, as tagged on IPOB has been removed. Therefore, the ruling of the court has also made it known to the world that IPOB is a known freedom fighting movement and the Nigeria government should desist from her destructive activities on IPOB members. That also gives credence to why Mazi Nnamdi stated clearly in court that he is not the leader of a proscribed IPOB. By the said ruling, the court affairmes the fact that Nnamdi Kanu is the leader of a free and undented indigenous peoples, and awarded damages of one billion Naira against federal government of Niggeria.

4. That the false claim of Mazi Nnamdi Kanu jumping bail has been demolished and put to rest by the said ruling of the court. And Senator Abaribe who stood as surety for Kanu's bail in 2017 has been vindicated. Therefore, Nigeria government has to also refund to Abaribe all the money he deposited in the court that has been assumed forfeited due to the false claim of Kanu jumping of bail.

5. That under the international arena, Mazi Nnamdi Kanu has been vindicated as a person being persecuted by Nigeria government instead of being prosecuted. The Nigeria media is therefore urged to stop stating that Mazi Nnamdi Kanu jumped bail. Rather, he escaped for his life.

6. That Though the State High Court and federal high court are courts of equal and coordinate jurisdictions, the ruling at the Abia State High Court, Umuahia is supposed to be a guide to the Judge of the Abuja federal high court in the remaining case of Mazi Nnamdi Kanu, if indeed Justice Binta Nyako is ready to render justice as it is supposed.


7. That regarding the question of extraordinary rendition of Mazi Nnamdi Kanu from Kenya, this court ruling has fortified one of the grounds of the preliminary objections of IPOB legal team, that "federal high court has no jurisdiction to entertain the matter before her". That Nigeria government broke various international laws and conventions by the extraordinary rendition. By the ruling, Nigeria government must first explain to the world how they got Kanu to Nigeria.

It is a notorious fact that the Nigeria military were the ones who went to Nnamdi Kanu's home in September 2017 and attempted to kill him. And in the circumstance, over 28 persons were killed and much properties destroyed in Kanu's compound. That Mazi Nnamdi Kanu, being human, has the natural rights to react to threats on his life. And so, adequately responded to the realities on ground by escaping for his dear life on the terrible day in September 2017. Therefore, he is justified for running away from Nigeria. It is simply a natural response.

So, the ruling alludes to the fact that before Nnamdi Kanu would come to Nigeria and stand trial, due process must be followed. But this case, Nigeria government violated the due process by kidnapping Kanu from Kenya, and renditioning him extraordinarily to Nigeria.

8. That Nigeria government owe the world an explanation on how they brought Mazi Nnamdi Kanu who was not in possession of Nigeria passport, to Nigeria. There is no provision anywhere in the law for Nigeria government to invoke her internal laws as a means to vacate her international obligations.

9. Mazi Nnamdi Kanu is a citizen of the world and has certain rights, protections and obligations under different international laws and conventions, which Nigeria government is also a signatory to, and is obligated to maintain, protect and respect.

The ruling at Abia State High Court in Umuahia has just affairmed that IPOB and Kanu must surely overcome.

Written By Nedum C.

Edited And Published By

Family Writers Press International.


No comments

Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.

Responsived Ad