Detained leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Mazi Nnamdi Kanu, has filed a fresh suit before the Federal High Court in Abuja, seeking to permanently halt his ongoing trial by the Federal Government.
In the new case, marked FHC/ABJ/CR/383/2015, Kanu argued that the continuation of his trial violates the rule of law, especially after the Court of Appeal had previously discharged him.
He described the proceedings as “a flagrant abuse of judicial process” and highlighted four fatal defects undermining the competence of the case — contempt of appellate authority, failure to take judicial notice of repeal, denial of fair hearing, and reliance on a forged document.
The suit stated, “These four defects strike at the root of jurisdiction.
“Each is independently fatal; together, they render the entire trial incompetent and void.”
Kanu contended that the Federal Government remains in contempt of a valid appellate judgment which, by law, had terminated his trial.
“By the doctrine of appellate finality, that order ended the trial absolutely,” he said, citing Governor of Lagos State v. Ojukwu (1986) and Rossek v. ACB Ltd (1993).
He further argued that the government, being in disobedience of a higher court’s order, cannot seek relief from a lower court, adding: “A contemnor cannot invoke the equitable discretion of a court while in defiance of its authority.”
On the issue of fair hearing, Kanu alleged that after spending four years in solitary confinement, he was granted only three hours of monitored access to his lawyers on the eve of entering his defence in a capital case. “That is not fair hearing — it is judicial perversity,” he declared.
Kanu also accused the court of relying on a forged medical report to rule that he was fit for trial. According to him, the purported report was dated September 23, 2025, three days before the court ordered the Nigerian Medical Association to conduct the medical examination on September 26, 2025. “No such examination ever took place,” he maintained, insisting that reliance on the document “vitiates the ruling.”
Citing Madukolu v. Nkemdilim (1962), Kanu argued that where any condition precedent to jurisdiction is missing, “the entire proceedings become a nullity.”
He therefore urged the court to declare the ongoing proceedings void and terminate the trial immediately, in the interest of justice and the rule of law.
