Dare Babalola
Nnamdi Kanu, the detained leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), has filed a fresh motion at the Federal High Court in Abuja, seeking the dismissal of all terrorism charges brought against him by the Federal Government.
In a motion filed on October 30, 2025, Kanu’s legal team argued that the charges against him are baseless, citing that no valid offense is established under Nigerian law.
He said the charges currently before the court are “a nullity ab initio for want of any extant legal foundation.”
Kanu, representing himself, filed the motion under relevant constitutional provisions, including Sections 1(3), 6(6)(b), and 36(12) of the 1999 Constitution, as well as the Evidence Act 2011 and the Terrorism (Prevention and Prohibition) Act 2022.
Kanu argued that the prosecution’s case relies on outdated and repealed laws, specifically the Customs and Excise Management Act (CEMA), which was superseded by the Nigeria Customs Service Act 2023, and the Terrorism Prevention (Amendment) Act 2013, which was repealed by the Terrorism (Prevention and Prohibition) Act 2022.
Kanu said the reliance on such repealed laws violates Section 36(12) of the Constitution, which prohibits trial for an offence not defined under an existing law. He therefore urged the court to strike out the charges in their entirety, insisting they do not constitute any offence known to law.
Citing the Supreme Court’s decision in FRN v. Kanu (SC/CR/1361/2022), he argued that lower courts are bound to take judicial notice of repealed laws under Section 122 of the Evidence Act 2011, adding that failure to do so renders all proceedings void.
Kanu also contended that the counts against him were allegedly committed in Kenya, in violation of Section 76(1)(d)(iii) of the TPPA 2022, which requires validation by a Kenyan court before such acts can be tried in Nigeria. He said this omission nullifies the court’s extraterritorial jurisdiction and breaches Article 7(2) of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights.
He further maintained that under Sections 1(3) and 36(12) of the Constitution, any law or judicial act inconsistent with the Constitution is void. He cited previous court decisions such as Aoko v. Fagbemi (1961) 1 All NLR 400 and FRN v. Ifegwu (2003) 15 NWLR (Pt 842) 113, where convictions based on non-existent laws were nullified.
Kanu urged the court to direct the prosecution to respond to his motion strictly on points of law within three days and to deliver a ruling on or before November 4, 2025.
He stated that his application raises only constitutional and legal questions derived from existing laws and therefore does not require an affidavit.
