The detained leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Mazi Nnamdi Kanu, has filed a fresh motion before the Federal High Court, Abuja, seeking the dismissal of all charges against him and his immediate release, insisting that the charges have no legal basis under Nigerian law.
In the motion dated October 30, 2025, and titled “Motion on Notice and Written Address in Support,” Kanu argued that the charges currently pending before the court are “a nullity ab initio for want of any extant legal foundation.”
Representing himself, Kanu filed the motion under 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 (TPPA) 2022.
He contended that the prosecution had relied on repealed and non-existent laws, including the Customs and Excise Management Act (CEMA) — repealed by the Nigeria Customs Service Act 2023 — and the Terrorism Prevention (Amendment) Act 2013, which was repealed by the TPPA 2022.
Kanu maintained that this reliance violates Section 36(12) of the Constitution, which prohibits the trial of any person for an offence not defined under an existing law. He therefore urged the court to strike out all the charges, insisting that “they do not constitute any offence known to law.”
Citing the Supreme Court’s decision in FRN v. Kanu (SC/CR/1361/2022), the IPOB leader argued that all lower courts are bound to take judicial notice of repealed laws under Section 122 of the Evidence Act 2011, adding that any failure to do so renders all proceedings void.
Kanu further argued that the counts against him allegedly stem from actions said to have occurred in Kenya, which, he said, violates Section 76(1)(d)(iii) of the TPPA 2022. The provision, he noted, requires that such acts must first be validated by a Kenyan court before they can be tried in Nigeria.
He insisted that the omission nullifies the court’s extraterritorial jurisdiction and breaches Article 7(2) of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, which guarantees fair trial and legal certainty.
Kanu also submitted that under Sections 1(3) and 36(12) of the Constitution, any law or judicial act inconsistent with the Constitution is void. He cited legal precedents including 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 by the courts.
The IPOB leader urged the court to direct the prosecution to respond to his motion strictly on points of law within three days and to deliver its ruling on or before November 4, 2025.
He emphasized that his application raises purely constitutional and legal questions derived from existing laws and, as such, does not require an affidavit.
