Hot Source
A member of the Nnamdi Kanu Global Defence Consortium, Barrister Onyedikachi Ifedi, has declared that there is no valid living charge against the leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra, IPOB.
Ifedi’s declaration is coming amid the November 5 deadline issued by Justice Kolawole Omotosho of the Abuja Federal High Court for Kanu to open his defense or waive the right.
In a legal note made available to journalists on Wednesday, Ifedi said there is no valid charge on which the Nigerian government could continue to prosecute Kanu.
“Kanu has no valid living or extant charge against him. None. Zero. Nullity. The entire charge sheet is a legal corpse – repealed, non-existent, and unamended in open defiance of a Supreme Court order.
“That is not opinion. That is black-letter law. That is Section 36(12) CFRN 1999.
That is the Supreme Court judgment of 15 December 2023. That is the truth the judge refused to acknowledge today,” the lawyer asserted.
Ifedi went ahead to highlight what transpired when Kanu appeared in court on November 4 to justify his argument that there is no valid charge against the IPOB leader.
Kanu, who represented himself, stood up in court and declared, “My Lord, there is no charge before this court” and immediately adopted his Motion on Notice filed on 30 October 2025, adding, “My Lord, this court lacks jurisdiction. There is no charge against me that exists in any current Nigerian statute. I ask that the court strikes it out today.”
The presiding judge, Justice Omotosho however refused to rule on the submission, noting that it is not a final address and that the court will take the motion at the appropriate stage.
Kanu, insisting on his submission, declared, “Jurisdiction is taken first, My Lord. Without a charge, there can be no stage.” The IPOB leader cited the pronouncement of the Supreme Court in the December 12, 2023 judgment, “Count 15 does not exist in the body of Nigerian laws. It is unknown to our law. The prosecution must amend it.”
Addressing the prosecution, he added, “You were ordered to amend it. You disobeyed. Yet you forced me to plead to a count that does not exist. That alone nullifies this entire proceeding.”
“Please tell this court the extant written law I allegedly broke. Just one law. The name, section, and statute in force today.”
Citing constitutional provisions, Kanu stressed, “Section 36(12) is clear. No person shall be tried or convicted for any offence not defined in a written law. No written law = no offence = no charge = no trial = no detention. I should not be here, My Lord.”
Responding to the court’s observation that the provision only applies at the point of conviction, not trial, Kanu argued, “My Lord, respectfully, that is wrong. The moment the law dies, jurisdiction dies. The trial cannot begin. It is a nullity ab initio.”
He cited Lord Camden’s ruling in Entick v. Carrington (1765), saying, “If the offence is not found in our law books, it is not law.”
“My Lord must take judicial notice of the repeal. That is the Evidence Act, Section 122,” he added.
Asked by the judge whether he is ready to open his defence or not, Kanu declared, “I will open my defence now — this minute — if you show me the extant law under which I am charged.”
Following the prosecution’s observation that he was wasting the time of the court, the IPOB leader said, “Senior Advocate, you accuse me of wasting time? Produce the law. If you show it to me, I will enter the dock this second. Let the world hear it.”
Accusing the court of denying him fair hearing, Kanu said, “This is constructive denial of fair hearing. You refuse to acknowledge the repeal of the law, refuse to obey the Supreme Court, refuse judicial notice. That is persecution, not a trial.”
With the court adjoining to November 5 with the ultimatum to enter defence or waive it, Kanu maintained his position, saying, “No law, no trial.”
Corroborating Kanu’s courtroom argument, the lawyer, Ifedi, noted that the Terrorism Prevention Amendment Act 2013 under which Kanu was charged had been repealed by the Terrorism (Prevention and Prohibition Act) 2022.
“No living law, no jurisdiction, no trial,” Ifedi asserted, and citing Section 36(12) of the 1999 Constitution, he declared, “If the offence is not written in a valid law, no court can try you.”
Further citing the case of Aoko v. Fagbemi (1961), the lawyer noted, “Trying or convicting under a non-existent law amounts to injustice.”
“Jurisdiction comes first. Without it, the entire trial collapses,” Ifedi added while citing Garba v. University of Maiduguri (1986).
“Kanu proved the charge is dead.
The court proved it does not want to admit it. Our demand is non-negotiable.
Obey the Supreme Court. Amend the charge or strike it out. Respect Section 36(12). Immediate release. End the charade. Free Mazi Nnamdi Kanu now,” the lawyer insisted.
