Treason or treasonable felony charges were all struck down on October 14, 2021 – Kanu.
Following today’s visit with Mazi Nnamdi Kanu, he directed his legal team to publicly clarify the following crucial points, which have been the source of repeated misinformation:
1. That all so-called treason or treasonable felony accusations were dismissed on October 14, 2021, at the request of the Federal Government due to a lack of evidence to support them. To be sure, these accusations were dropped after Mazi Nnamdi had spent eighteen months in prison and six years on trial for them. Thus, the abrupt shift from treason to terrorism following the extraordinary rendition reveals a questionable maneuver by the Federal Government to adjust the goalposts, which directly contributed to Mazi Nnamdi Kanu’s current lengthy detention.
To be clear, treason (under Section 41 of the Criminal Code) requires proof of intent to subvert the state, which Mazi Kanu’s pre-2017 self-determination actions do not meet. After his abduction in 2021, the government reframed the case as terrorism, leveraging IPOB’s 2017 proscription by Abubakar Malami and the late Justice Kafarati to target post-2017 Mazi Nnamdi Kanu’s broadcasts and leadership as a means of crippling a legitimate agitation for self-determination—a protected right under Article 20 of the African Charter, enacted by the National Assembly in 1983.
2. To be clear, Mazi Nnamdi Kanu was not “arrested” in Kenya but rather abducted in what the Supreme Court (per Justice Emmanuel Agim) described as a “criminal abduction” and “executive lawlessness,” a damning condemnation of the Nigerian government’s actions by Nigeria’s highest court. It is identical to the brazen and criminal method in which kidnappers grab their victims and demand ransom. The Supreme Court also noted severe violations of international law and standards (e.g., extradition treaties) and Nigerian law (e.g., fair hearing and due process), in line with the UN Working Group’s July 2022 finding that Mazi Nnamdi Kanu’s imprisonment was arbitrary.
3. Above all, the Federal government ignored a binding 2016 Federal High Court verdict that determined IPOB is not an illegal group and instead used a procedurally faulty 2017 proscription to levy a notorious rendition against Mazi Nnamdi Kanu. Mazi Nnamdi Kanu’s prosecution is still based on the fundamentally faulty 2017 proscription of IPOB. All of these abnormalities will eventually cease to exist.
