AVID Condemns Justice Omotosho’s Ruling, Warns of Fair Hearing Breach in Kanu’s Trial

The American Veterans of Igbo Descent (AVID) has strongly criticized what it described as a “continuing judicial travesty” in the ongoing trial of the leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Mazi Nnamdi Kanu, before Justice James Omotosho of the Federal High Court, Abuja.

In a statement issued on Thursday and signed by its President, Chief Dr. Sylvester Onyia, the group expressed “grave concern and total condemnation” over what it termed the erosion of constitutional and judicial standards in Kanu’s prosecution.

AVID alleged that the proceedings lack legal foundation and contravene both domestic and international principles of fair hearing.

According to the group, “Nigeria’s 1999 Constitution (as amended) is clear under Section 36(12) that no person shall be tried for any criminal offence unless that offence and its penalty are defined in a written law. This safeguard is non-derogable and remains a cornerstone of due process and justice in any civilized nation.”

The organization accused the Federal Government of continuing to prosecute Kanu under the repealed Terrorism (Prevention) (Amendment) Act, 2013, despite the enactment of the Terrorism (Prevention and Prohibition) Act, 2022, which replaced it.

“Before the world and under Justice Omotosho’s watch, the Nigerian state persists in trying Mazi Nnamdi Kanu under a dead law — the Terrorism (Prevention) (Amendment) Act, 2013 — which ceased to exist upon the enactment of the 2022 Act,” the group said.

AVID further accused Justice Omotosho of failing to take judicial notice of the repeal as required under Section 122(2)(a) of the Evidence Act, describing it as “a judicial dereliction of constitutional duty.”

The veterans’ group also faulted the judge’s decision to defer ruling on issues of jurisdiction and double jeopardy until final judgment, arguing that such matters go to the root of any criminal proceeding.

“Justice Omotosho’s ‘wait till judgment’ posture on questions of jurisdiction, double jeopardy, and validity of charge contradicts established precedents of the Supreme Court of Nigeria. Jurisdictional defects must be determined immediately, not deferred,” the statement emphasized.

Citing Section 76(1)(d)(iii) of the Terrorism (Prevention and Prohibition) Act, 2022, AVID noted that any alleged act of terrorism committed abroad must also constitute an offence in the jurisdiction where it occurred — in this case, Kenya, where Kanu was allegedly abducted.

“This double criminality requirement has not been satisfied, yet the judge insists on proceeding, thereby nullifying the moral and legal foundation of the entire trial,” the group argued.

AVID also decried what it described as “constitutional infidelity” and the silence of Nigeria’s legal institutions, including the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA), the National Judicial Council (NJC), and legal commentators.

“It is appalling that in the face of such manifest constitutional violations, Nigeria’s legal institutions have chosen cowardly silence. A nation whose lawyers fear to ask, ‘Under what law is this man being tried?’ has surrendered its conscience to tyranny,” the statement read.

The group further alleged the destruction of every element of fair hearing guaranteed under Section 36(1) of the Constitution, citing denial of access to lawyers and family while in DSS custody and judicial disregard for documentary evidence.

AVID also recounted an incident in open court where Kanu allegedly requested a brief recess in the judge’s chambers “to prevent the judiciary’s embarrassment” but was denied.

“When Kanu asked, ‘Under what law am I being tried?’ Justice Omotosho responded, ‘Wait till judgment.’ That a sitting Federal High Court judge can preside over a criminal trial without identifying a subsisting law is the ultimate indictment of Nigeria’s judicial decay,” the group stated.

The organization called on international bodies, including the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC), the U.S. Department of State, the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights, and the International Criminal Court (ICC), to monitor and document what it described as ongoing judicial abuses in Nigeria.

“The trial of Mazi Nnamdi Kanu, in its present form, is not only a constitutional aberration but an affront to international human rights standards on fair trial and rule of law,” the statement said.

AVID concluded by urging Nigeria to “choose between law and lawlessness,” stating that the proceedings undermine the country’s democratic claims.

“Justice Omotosho’s courtroom has become a theatre of constitutional absurdity — a place where a man is asked to defend himself under a non-existent law, where judicial notice is optional, and where constitutional provisions are treated as irritants. If Nigeria still claims to be a constitutional democracy, it must immediately halt this charade, restore the rule of law, and release Mazi Nnamdi Kanu unconditionally,” the group declared.