The Supreme Court held that although the Nigerian government recklessly and unlawfully rendered Kanu from Kenya, such an unlawful act has not deterred any court from proceeding with trial
The apex court subsequently ordered that Kanu should go and defend himself on the remaining seven counts of terrorism charges against him.
In the treason case against Nnamdi Kanu, the leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), the Court of Appeal’s decision to discharge and acquit him was overturned by the Supreme Court.
The highest court ruled that even though he was forcibly returned to Nigeria from Kenya after he violated his bail conditions, the trial court was nonetheless able to proceed with his trial notwithstanding this incident.
The decision underscores the importance of adhering to legal procedures, even in cases involving individuals facing serious charges. While acknowledging the government’s responsibility to address security concerns, the court asserted that these actions must be conducted within the boundaries of the law.
In a pivotal move, the Supreme Court ordered Nnamdi Kanu to defend himself against the remaining seven counts of terrorism charges. This decision not only reignited the legal battle but also raised questions about the intricacies of the charges against him and the evidence presented.
The ruling sparked varied reactions across the nation. Supporters of Kanu and advocates for Biafran independence viewed the decision as a setback, while others saw it as a necessary step in ensuring justice prevails. The case has become a focal point for discussions on the rule of law and the balance between national security and individual rights.
The Nigerian government unjustly and unlawfully rendered Kanu from Kenya, but it does not stop any court from moving forward with a trial, according to the Supreme Court.
Justice Lawal said that no Nigerian law was cited in the suit seeking Kanu’s release on mere unlawful abduction from Kenya, adding that at the moment, the remedy for such action is for Kanu to file a civil matter against such an act instead of removing the powers of the courts to continue with his trial for alleged criminal charges.
The apex court subsequently ordered that Kanu should go and defend himself on the remaining seven counts of terrorism charges against him.
This is a developing story…
