Appeal Court Discharges Kanu, Cites Faulty Extradition Process – THISDAYLIVE

*Says trial court lacks jurisdiction due to faulty extradition process

Alex Enumah in Abuja

The Abuja Division of the Court of Appeal on Thursday discharged leader of the proscribed Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) Mazi Nnamdi Kanu, from the 15-count terrorism charge brought against him by the federal government.

The appellate court in a unanimous decision faulted the process by which Kanu was brought before the Federal High Court to answer to a 15-count terrorism charge.

According to the judgment, the arrest, abduction and subsequent arraignment of Kanu before a Federal High Court violated international convention on terrorism and thus robbed any court of law in Nigeria necessary jurisdiction to entertain the suit.

Justice Adedotun Adefope-Okijie who read the judgment of the three man panel noted that there was no where the federal government showed it complied with the procedures for the extradition of the IPOB leader from Kenya last year.

The appellate court listed the conditions according to the Organization of Africa Unity (OAU), which a state must meet to include a formal application for extradition to the host country, permission from court, statement of the alleged offences in connection with the extradition request amongst others.

The court explained that the requirements was aimed at ensuring that people are only extradited after full conviction or committal and not for any other purpose.

She held that Nigeria must learn to play by the rules and that the courts owe the country and people a duty to ensure that the executive abides by the law at all times particularly when the country is a signatory to such laws.

While Justice Adefope-Okijie noted that the court may not have the powers to dictate to the executive it can however prevent the executive from abusing the law, adding that courts should not be shy to always call the executive to order.

The appellate court in its judgment further held that the trial court ought to have evaluated the circumstances Kanu was brought into the country to continue his trial.

According to the three man panel, the issue of jurisdiction raised by the appellant was one that was critical to the case which the court ought to have resolved first.

While stating that the issue of jurisdiction was properly raised before the trial court, Justice Adefope-Okijie observed that the trial court turned a blind eye to it. 

“The lower court must pronounce properly on all issues presented before it. The trial court ought to have made findings on the issue raised regarding the extradition”, she held.

It said the lower court therefore has no jurisdiction to try the respondent in the retained charges. “No court can try him going by the circumstances of the extraordinary rendition “, the court held. 

According to the judgment, the federal government violated international convention on terrorism which it is a signatory when it illegally arrested Kanu in Kenya and extraordinarily brought him to Nigeria for trial.

The appellate court held that the warrant of arrest issued against Kanu was not enough reason or excuse for the government to violate international convention and charters. 

“Having resolved issue one in favour of the appellant, which deals with jurisdiction, the appeal succeed, the order of Justice Binta Nyako which ordered appellant to answer to counts 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 8 and 15 is set aside, terminated and dismissed.

“Appellant is accordingly discharged”, the appellate court held. 

Kanu had faulted the order of Justice Binta Nyako of a Federal High Court, Abuja, which had in April this year ordered him to respond to 7 out of the 15 count terrorism charge against him.

Recall that Justice Nyako had while ruling in Kanu’s application challenging the jurisdiction of the court as well as the competence of the charge struck out 8 of the charges for being incompetent and lacking in merit. 

In arguing the appeal, Kanu’s lawyer, Chief Mike Ozekhome, SAN told the three man panel that kanu was first arraigned on December 23,2015, and granted bail on April 25, 2017.

He explained further that agents of the federal government (the respondent) had launched a military operation, code named “Operation Python Dance” at the appellant’s home town in September 2017, which forced him to escape out of the country, to Isreal, then London. 

The senior advocate recalled that on June 27 2021, “the federal government forcefully arrested Kanu in Kenya and renditioned him back to Nigeria “in most cruel and inhuman manner”. 

“On 29 June, 2021, the appellant was taken to court by the federal government, where he was rearraigned.”

According to the three man panel, the issue of jurisdiction is very key in any trial and must be resolved before further issues once raised.

The appellate court while stating that the issue of jurisdiction was properly raised before the trial court as to the circumstances Kanu was extradited into the country, observed that the trial court turned a blind eye to it. 

According to the judgment, the federal government violated international convention on terrorism, which it is a signatory, when it illegally arrested Kanu in Kenya and extraordinarily brought him to Nigeria for trial.

The appellate court held that the warrant of arrest issued against Kanu was not enough reason or excuse for the government to violate international convention and charters.