Categories: metro

Nnamdi Kanu files fresh motion, seeks dismissal of charges (photos)

Nnamdi Kanu

Nnamdi Kanu files fresh motion, seeks dismissal of charges (photos)

Detained leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Mazi Nnamdi Kanu, has filed a fresh motion before the Federal High Court in Abuja, seeking to strike out all charges against him and secure his immediate release.

In the motion titled “Motion on Notice and Written Address in Support” dated October 30, 2025, Kanu, who is representing himself, argued that the charges brought against him are legally baseless and should be dismissed outright.

“There is no charge or counts cognisable within the corpus juris of the Federal Republic of Nigeria,” Kanu stated, describing the charges as “a nullity ab initio for want of any extant legal foundation.”

The IPOB leader filed the motion pursuant to several constitutional and statutory provisions, including Sections 1(3), 6(6)(b), and 36(12) of the 1999 Constitution, the Evidence Act 2011, and the Terrorism (Prevention and Prohibition) Act (TPPA), 2022.

Kanu contended that the prosecution relied on repealed laws, including the Customs and Excise Management Act (CEMA) and the Terrorism Prevention (Amendment) Act 2013, both of which have been repealed by newer legislation. He argued that this reliance violates the constitutional principle that no one can be tried for an offence not defined under existing law.

He cited the Supreme Court’s ruling in FRN v. Kanu (SC/CR/1361/2022), which directed courts to take judicial notice of repealed statutes under Section 122 of the Evidence Act, and warned that failure to do so renders proceedings void. He also referenced NNPC v. Fawehinmi (1998) 7 NWLR (Pt 559) 598 to support his claim.

Jurisdictional Challenge

Kanu further challenged the court’s jurisdiction over alleged offences said to have occurred in Kenya, arguing that Counts 1 to 6 in the charge sheet violate Section 76(1)(d)(iii) of the TPPA 2022, which requires validation by a Kenyan court confirming that the acts are criminal under Kenyan law before trial in Nigeria.

He maintained that the prosecution’s failure to meet this requirement nullifies Nigeria’s extraterritorial jurisdiction and breaches Article 7(2) of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights.

Quoting Section 1(3) of the Constitution, Kanu insisted that any law or proceeding inconsistent with the Constitution is void, and that his continued trial and detention lack constitutional backing.

He also cited judicial precedents such as Aoko v. Fagbemi (1961) 1 All NLR 400 and FRN v. Ifegwu (2003) 15 NWLR (Pt 842) 113, where courts nullified convictions based on non-existent offences.

Urgent Hearing Sought

Kanu urged the court to compel the prosecution to respond strictly on points of law within three days and to deliver a ruling on or before Tuesday, November 4, 2025.

“The Defendant/Applicant has complied with this Honourable Court’s directive of 27 October 2025 by filing a comprehensive written address asserting that no valid or cognisable charge subsists against him, either under extant Nigerian statutes or any law recognized in Kenya,” the motion reads.

He emphasized that his application is based solely on legal arguments and therefore does not require a supporting affidavit.

The court is expected to review the motion and determine whether the charges against the IPOB leader can stand under current Nigerian and international legal frameworks.