Kanu’s Trial Faces Scrutiny as Defence Cites Procedural Violations

Fresh concern is building over the trial of Nnamdi Kanu as his defence team raised alarm about how the Federal High Court in Abuja is handling the case. The lawyers said the process has shifted away from proper legal steps and could affect both their client and the justice system if not addressed.

The issue came to public attention after the Mazi Nnamdi Kanu Global Defence Consortium released a detailed statement through Barrister Onyedikachi Ifedi. The team argued that Kanu is still being tried under the 2013 terrorism law, which was replaced by the Terrorism Prevention and Prohibition Act in 2022. They said the old law is no longer valid and should not form the basis of any trial.

They also raised concern about who is involved in the matter, claiming the court has refused to hear their objections on jurisdiction and constitutionality. According to them, these issues form the base of any criminal trial, and ignoring them breaks long-standing legal practice. They warned that this could raise doubt about whether the proceedings are fair.

The lawyers said the major problem lies in the pattern they believe the court is following. They accused the judge of continuing with charges under the repealed law while planning to rely on the new 2022 law at judgment. They said this raises the fear of a ruling that may not stand and could cause long-term controversy.

They further explained when the process began to derail, noting that the turning point came when the court blocked their attempt to file a final written address. They said this stage gives a defendant the last chance to present all arguments before judgment is delivered, and removing it affects the right to fair hearing.

They warned why Nigerians should pay attention, saying any court that uses a repealed law, blocks objections, and denies a final address could set a pattern that may one day affect any citizen standing trial. They said such a direction places the justice system at risk.

The defence team ended by stating how they intend to respond. They called on the Nigerian Bar Association, civil society groups, human rights organisations, the media, and international observers to closely monitor the case. They said they will continue to use lawful channels to challenge every step that they believe threatens the fairness of the trial, insisting that justice must be real and not a planned outcome.