The Supreme Court of Nigeria has come under fresh criticism following its December 15, 2023 judgment in the case of Federal Republic of Nigeria v. Nnamdi Kanu, with legal experts describing the ruling as a “catastrophic failure of judicial duty.”

In a statement issued on Thursday, Onyedikachi Ifedi Esq., speaking for the Mazi Nnamdi Kanu Global Defence Consortium, said the apex court’s decision to condone the Federal Government’s extraordinary rendition of Kanu from Kenya and allow his trial to proceed amounted to a grave departure from constitutional precedent.

Crisis of Constitutionality

According to the group, the judgment “represents a dangerous shift from the rule of law to judicial tyranny.” They argued that the case was not about Kanu’s guilt or innocence but about whether the Supreme Court could undermine Nigeria’s Constitution—the nation’s highest law—for the sake of one man.

“The judgment is per incuriam—rendered in ignorance of binding law—and is therefore worthless,” the statement read.

The Issue of Nullity

The defence consortium stressed that the matter was not a legal technicality but one of nullity, insisting that any trial built upon an illegal foundation could not stand.

They pointed out that Kanu’s abduction from Kenya and subsequent rendition violated multiple international treaties, denied him access to legal counsel, and breached the principle of fair hearing guaranteed under Section 36 of the 1999 Constitution and the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights.

“The doctrine of the ‘fruit of the poisonous tree’ applies. You cannot build a legitimate trial on an illegitimate foundation,” the lawyers stated.

Ignored Legal Precedents

The consortium accused the Supreme Court of disregarding decades of settled law, citing cases such as:

  • Ariori v. Elemo (1983) – where the Court held that any breach of natural justice renders proceedings a nullity.

  • Adigun v. A.G. Oyo State (1987) – which established that violation of fair hearing nullifies subsequent proceedings.

They argued that by downplaying Kanu’s extraordinary rendition as a mere “irregularity,” the Court undermined the Constitution’s non-derogable guarantees.

International Dimension

The lawyers also pointed to the High Court of Kenya’s June 24, 2025 judgment, which independently confirmed Kanu’s abduction, torture, and denial of due process, aligning with the Nigerian Court of Appeal’s 2022 ruling.

“For the Nigerian judiciary to say that a trial founded on such crimes can still be fair is a mockery of justice and damages Nigeria’s standing internationally,” the statement added.

Dangerous Precedent

The group warned that if the Supreme Court’s judgment stands, it would set a dangerous precedent whereby the government could abduct critics from abroad without due process, while citizens’ fundamental rights would effectively become negotiable.

“This judgment signals that the executive is above the law, eroding the foundation of our democracy,” Ifedi said.

Call to Action

The statement urged the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA), civil society, and the media to rise against what it called “judicial sanctioning of impunity.” It also appealed to the international community to hold Nigeria accountable for violations of human rights and international law.

“The only just outcome is for the Supreme Court to review and overturn its decision, declare the proceedings against Kanu a nullity, and order his release,” the consortium declared.