Kanu Family Urges NBA to Intervene Over Alleged Violations of Rule of Law in Nnamdi Kanu’s Trial

The family of the detained leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Mazi Nnamdi Kanu, has accused the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) of maintaining what it describes as a disturbing silence over alleged constitutional and legal breaches in his ongoing prosecution.

In an open letter addressed to the NBA and signed by Prince Emmanuel Okwu-Kanu on behalf of the Okwu-Kanu family, the association was accused of failing in its duty by staying silent while “an unlawful court case” against Kanu continues.

According to the family, “the NBA has failed in its duty, and its silence in the face of clear constitutional violations has allowed an unlawful and invalid court case against Mazi Nnamdi Kanu to continue.”

They argued that Kanu is being prosecuted under a repealed law, insisting that the Terrorism (Prevention Amendment) Act 2013, which forms the basis of the charges, became defunct following the enactment of the Terrorism Prevention and Prohibition Act 2022.

Below is the full text of the letter:

—

OPEN LETTER TO THE NIGERIAN BAR ASSOCIATION (NBA)

From the Okwu-Kanu Family
To the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA):
The NBA’s Silence Is Helping an Unlawful Court Case Against Mazi Nnamdi Kanu – And It Is Breaking Our Constitution

The Okwu-Kanu family writes to the Nigerian Bar Association with utmost sincerity, stating that the NBA has failed in its responsibility by remaining silent in the face of constitutional violations surrounding Mazi Nnamdi Kanu’s trial. The family asserts that the NBA, established to protect the rule of law, has watched quietly while Kanu is tried under a repealed law—contrary to Section 36(12) of the 1999 Constitution.

They noted that the controlling legislation for terrorism prosecutions is the Terrorism Prevention and Prohibition Act 2022, not the repealed Terrorism (Prevention Amendment) Act 2013. They further referenced Section 76(1)(d)(iii) of the 2022 Act, arguing that no Nigerian court has jurisdiction to try Kanu for alleged offences said to have occurred abroad, especially when Kenya—where the alleged acts occurred—has not accused or charged him with any offence.

The family emphasized that the Constitution, as interpreted by the Supreme Court in several cases including Okenwa v. Military Governor of Imo State, Akinyede v. The Appraiser, Uwaifo v. Attorney-General of Bendel State, and Aoko v. Fagbemi, does not permit anyone to be tried under a repealed law.

They dismissed reliance on Section 98(3) of the 2022 Act, stating that the clause cannot validate Kanu’s ongoing trial because it is a fresh proceeding, and no statutory provision can override the Constitution.

The letter questioned the NBA’s reluctance to speak on the issues, asking whether the association had become fearful or politically compromised. It warned that NBA’s silence undermines the rule of law, emboldens judicial misconduct, and endangers many Nigerians whose cases may also be affected by the use of invalid laws.

The family called on the NBA to publicly affirm that no individual can be tried under a repealed law, to uphold the principle of double criminality in line with Section 76 of the 2022 Act, and to speak against judicial violations of constitutional provisions.

According to the family, the NBA must decide whether it will defend the Constitution or continue to “watch injustice spread.” They cautioned that if the association refuses to act, history will remember it as a body that failed in its duty.

They concluded by urging the NBA to “rediscover its conscience,” defend the rule of law, and prevent further injustices arising from the use of repealed legislation.