Detained leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Mazi Nnamdi Kanu, has intensified his legal battle against the Nigerian government by filing a fresh motion before the Federal High Court in Abuja. In this latest filing, he is urging the court to dismiss all remaining charges against him and order his immediate release from custody.
The motion, submitted on October 30, 2025, and titled “Motion on Notice and Written Address in Support,” argues that the legal basis of his prosecution is fundamentally flawed and constitutionally defective.
Kanu contends that every charge still pending against him lacks legitimacy, insisting they are grounded on laws that are no longer in existence and therefore have no force of law in Nigeria.
Kanu Says Government Relied on Repealed Laws
Acting as his own counsel, the IPOB leader filed the application under key provisions of the 1999 Constitution (as amended), including Sections 1(3), 6(6)(b), and 36(12), alongside relevant portions of the Evidence Act 2011 and Terrorism (Prevention and Prohibition) Act 2022.
He argued that the Federal Government cited repealed statutes such as the Customs and Excise Management Act (CEMA)—which has been replaced by the Nigeria Customs Service Act 2023—and the Terrorism Prevention (Amendment) Act 2013, repealed by the TPPA 2022.
According to him, this legal defect violates Section 36(12) of the Constitution, which prohibits trying anyone for an offence not currently defined by a valid law in force.
He maintained that continuing with a trial founded on repealed statutes would amount to a grave miscarriage of justice and a nullity in law.
“No Recognisable Offence Disclosed”
Kanu further urged the court to terminate the case entirely on the grounds that the allegations against him fail to establish any offence recognized under Nigerian law.
He referenced the Supreme Court’s decision in FRN v. Kanu (SC/CR/1361/2022), affirming that courts are bound to recognize when laws have been repealed, as stipulated under Section 122 of the Evidence Act 2011.
Ignoring such changes, he insisted, renders any proceedings and charges null and void.
Claims Alleged Offences Occurred in Kenya
In another critical point, Kanu stated that the alleged offences were said to have been committed in Kenya. He pointed to Section 76(1)(d)(iii) of the TPPA 2022, which requires validation by a Kenyan court before any such matter can be tried in Nigeria.
By not meeting this requirement, he argued, Nigerian authorities violated jurisdictional rules, thereby stripping the court of the legal authority to hear the case and breaching Article 7(2) of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights.
He stressed that this breach invalidates the prosecution’s authority and strengthens his call for immediate dismissal.
Pushes for Hearing Before November 4
Relying on precedents including Aoko v. Fagbemi (1961) and FRN v. Ifegwu (2003), Kanu noted that courts have historically struck out cases based on repealed or invalid laws.
He therefore requested an accelerated hearing of his motion—filed strictly on points of law—before November 4, 2025.
The motion also demands that the Federal Government file its response within three days, highlighting the urgency surrounding the matter.
Kanu emphasized that no affidavit accompanies the application because it hinges solely on constitutional questions and legal interpretation, not on disputed facts.
As the new legal battle unfolds, all eyes remain on the Federal High Court and the Nigerian government’s next steps, with supporters and critics alike anticipating another pivotal moment in the long-running case surrounding the IPOB leader.