A fresh twist has emerged in the long-running trial of Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) leader, Mazi Nnamdi Kanu, as a new legal brief argues that the government’s prosecution has been fatally undermined by a jurisdictional error committed by Justice James Omotosho of the Federal High Court, Abuja.

According to the brief, prepared by legal consultant Njoku Jude Njoku Esq. for the Mazi Nnamdi Kanu Global Defence Consortium, Justice Omotosho’s decision to reject Kanu’s no-case submission has inadvertently collapsed the case. The court, it argues, wrongly proceeded under the repealed Terrorism Prevention (Amendment) Act 2013 (TPAA 2013), instead of the current Terrorism (Prevention and Prohibition) Act 2022 (TPPA 2022).

Citing the Supreme Court’s ruling in NNPC v. Fawehinmi (1998), the brief stresses that “failure to take judicial notice of a law or its repeal, where such notice is mandatory, vitiates the proceedings.” By ignoring the repeal of TPAA 2013, the legal team insists, the court has stripped itself of jurisdiction, rendering all subsequent rulings “null and void.”

Why the Error Matters

Section 122 of the Evidence Act 2011 obliges courts to take judicial notice of laws and repeals without prompting. The omission, the brief argues, amounts to a “jurisdictional collapse.” A court without jurisdiction, it adds, cannot lawfully try anyone, regardless of the allegations.

The defence further dismisses arguments that the savings clause in Section 97 of TPPA 2022 could preserve the case. It points out that although the trial was active when TPPA came into force in May 2022, the Court of Appeal’s discharge of Kanu on October 13, 2022 broke continuity. For 14 months, until the Supreme Court remitted the case in December 2023, it was no longer “ongoing,” making Section 97 inapplicable.

The legal team cites Okafor v. Nweke (2007) to buttress its position that actions founded on repealed laws remain a nullity even after being revived.

Prosecution on Shaky Ground

The brief concludes that the combination of prosecuting under a repealed statute, ignoring the Supreme Court’s precedent, and the 14-month break in continuity has left the case “legally dead.”

It warns that even if the government pushes ahead, any conviction would be overturned on appeal, either in Nigeria or before international courts such as the ECOWAS Court of Justice or the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights.

Call for Political Resolution

“The ruling has not advanced the government’s case—it has crippled it,” the brief states, urging the federal government to consider a political resolution with Kanu rather than pursue what it describes as a “legally untenable prosecution.”

Njoku Jude Njoku Esq., who prepared the document, concludes that negotiation is not just the “wiser path” but the “only lawful and sustainable option remaining.”