Nnamdi Kanu Files Another Motion, Insist on Release and Case Dismissal

Detained IPOB leader, Nnamdi Kanu, has filed a fresh motion before a Federal High Court in Abuja, insisting on the dismissal of all charges against him and his immediate release from custody.

Kanu, who was first arrested in October 2015 and arraigned on an 11-count charge bordering on terrorism and treasonable felony, insists that there is no valid case against him under any existing Nigerian law.

“The charges before this court are a nullity ab initio for want of any extant legal foundation,” he stated in his new motion dated October 30, 2025.

Kanu’s Legal Arguments

Acting as his own counsel, Kanu filed the motion under Sections 1(3), 6(6)(b), and 36(12) of the 1999 Constitution, along with provisions of the Evidence Act 2011 and the Terrorism (Prevention and Prohibition) Act 2022.

He argued that the prosecution relied on repealed laws, including the Customs and Excise Management Act (CEMA) — replaced by the Nigeria Customs Service Act 2023 — and the Terrorism Prevention (Amendment) Act 2013, which was repealed by the new TPPA 2022.

According to him, this reliance breaches Section 36(12) of the Constitution, which forbids the trial of any person for an offence not defined by existing law.

“No one shall be tried for an offence under a law that no longer exists,” Kanu said, urging the court to strike out the case completely.

He cited the Supreme Court’s decision in FRN v. Kanu (SC/CR/1361/2022), arguing that lower courts are bound to take judicial notice of repealed laws under Section 122 of the Evidence Act. “Failure to do so renders the proceedings void,” he maintained.

Jurisdiction and Human Rights Claims

Kanu also contended that the alleged offences occurred in Kenya, outside Nigeria’s jurisdiction, in breach of Section 76(1)(d)(iii) of the TPPA 2022. He said this section requires that any such act committed abroad must first be validated by a competent court in that country — in this case, Kenya.

He further argued that the omission nullifies Nigeria’s extraterritorial jurisdiction and violates Article 7(2) of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights.

Drawing on constitutional provisions, Kanu stressed that any law or judicial act inconsistent with the Constitution is void under Sections 1(3) and 36(12). He cited earlier cases such as Aoko v. Fagbemi (1961) and FRN v. Ifegwu (2003), where convictions under non-existent laws were overturned.

Push for Urgent Ruling

In his motion, Kanu urged the court to compel the prosecution to respond within three days, and to deliver its ruling by November 4, 2025. He noted that his application raises purely legal and constitutional questions and therefore does not require any supporting affidavit.

“This motion touches only on points of law. No affidavit is necessary where the facts are already before the court,” Kanu said.

Kanu was re-arrested in June 2021 after being detained in Kenya and extradited to Nigeria — a move his lawyers continue to challenge as unlawful. His trial, which has dragged for nearly a decade, remains one of the most politically sensitive cases in Nigeria’s judicial history.

Rate, Like 👍, Comment 💬, Share this article, Follow us on our social media handles, and Submit your own story to get featured and earn rewards!