The family of Nnamdi Kanu has condemned the Nigerian Bar Association, NBA, for remaining silent over what it described as the unlawful trial of the detained leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra, IPOB.
The Okwu-Kanu family expressed its concerns in a statement signed by Prince Emmanuel Kanu and titled “The NBA’s Silence Is Helping an Unlawful Court Case Against Mazi Nnamdi Kanu, And It Is Breaking Our Constitution.”
The family noted that the NBA has so far failed in its duty regarding Kanu’s trial, which it insists is based on a repealed and non-existent law.
It expressed disappointment that the foremost lawyers’ association has not deemed it necessary to speak out or condemn the development.
Parts of the statement read:
“The Okwu-Kanu family wishes to address the Nigerian Bar Association directly and truthfully, without sugarcoating or politeness that hides the painful reality. The hard truth is that the NBA has failed in its duty, and its silence in the face of clear constitutional violations has allowed an unlawful and fake court case against Mazi Nnamdi Kanu to continue.
“The NBA, a body created to defend the rule of law and protect the legal order, has stood by quietly while Mazi Nnamdi Kanu is being tried under a law that no longer exists — a law repealed by the National Assembly, and whose use in any court violates Section 36(12) of the 1999 Constitution.
“Throughout this period, the NBA has spoken no word, taken no action, and made no attempt to educate the public or correct the dangerous misunderstanding surrounding this trial. This is not neutrality; it is aiding injustice by doing nothing.
“The controlling law for terrorism-related prosecutions in Nigeria today is the Terrorism Prevention and Prohibition Act 2022, not a repealed law, and that law makes it clear in Section 76(1)(d)(iii) that no Nigerian court can try a person for an offence allegedly committed in another country unless that foreign country also regards the alleged act as a crime.
“Kenya has never accused, investigated, or charged Mazi Nnamdi Kanu with any crime of any kind. In simple language, this means there is no double criminality and therefore no jurisdiction. Without jurisdiction, a trial is impossible. This is basic law that any second-year law student understands, yet the NBA has behaved as if the meaning is hidden or confusing.
“Even worse, the ongoing trial is anchored entirely on the repealed Terrorism (Prevention Amendment) Act 2013, a law that ceased to exist when the 2022 Act came into effect. The Constitution is very clear in Section 36(12) that no person may be tried for any criminal offence unless the law defining the offence is written and in force at the time of trial. A repealed law is not in force and cannot be used to charge anyone.
“This is not our personal opinion; it is the binding position of the Supreme Court in cases such as Okenwa v. Military Governor of Imo State, Akinyede v. The Appraiser, Uwaifo v. Attorney-General of Bendel State, and Aoko v. Fagbemi. These cases all affirm that a repealed criminal law is dead, wiped away, and cannot legally support a prosecution. Yet the NBA has acted as if these decisions do not exist or as if the Constitution has suddenly become optional.”
The statement continued:
“Some have tried to hide behind Section 98(3) of the 2022 Act, the so-called savings clause, but even that argument fails because the trial before Justice Omotosho is a completely fresh trial and cannot be ‘saved’ by a clause meant to preserve proceedings that were already ongoing. Besides, no clause in any Act can override the Constitution, and Section 36(12) cannot be defeated by legislative wording.
“The Constitution sits above every other law, and when any law conflicts with it, the Constitution prevails. Yet the NBA continues to act as if this simple hierarchy has become too complex to remember.
“We must therefore ask a difficult question: why is the NBA refusing to say what is clearly true? Has the NBA become afraid of the government? Has it lost the courage to speak? Has it forgotten that its first duty is to defend the Constitution, not to stay silent for political comfort?
“Has it become an organisation that watches injustice in silence instead of challenging it? The NBA cannot claim to be a guardian of justice while allowing courts to rely on dead laws and unconstitutional procedures without protest.”
The family warned that the NBA’s silence has real consequences beyond Nnamdi Kanu, noting that when the Bar refuses to challenge obvious illegality in a public case, it normalises abuses, empowers judges who ignore clear legal limits, leaves ordinary Nigerians helpless, and sends a message to the world that Nigerian lawyers no longer understand or defend their own laws.
According to the statement, many Nigerians remain in prison today because their cases were handled carelessly by lawyers who failed to challenge invalid charges or defective laws.
“The NBA must now decide whether it wants to be an institution that protects the rule of law or one that passively watches injustice spread.
Leave a Comment