Public Advocacy Brief: Why Fair Hearing in Nnamdi Kanu’s Case Cannot Be Compromised

The Bedrock of Justice

The Nigerian Constitution is not just a political document; it is the supreme law of the land. Section 36 of the 1999 Constitution (as amended) enshrines the Right to Fair Hearing as a non-derogable right absolute, inviolable, and beyond the reach of any arm of government.

Neither the Executive, nor the Legislature, nor even the Judiciary, possesses the lawful authority to suspend or dilute it. Any judicial proceeding that denies this right is void ab initio, a legal nothing from the very start.

This principle is not abstract. It is central to the case of Mazi Nnamdi Kanu, the leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), whose ordeal has become a litmus test for Nigeria’s commitment to the rule of law.

What Actually Happened

Instead of being subjected to a lawful extradition process in line with the Extradition Act, Cap E25 LFN 2004, Kanu was forcibly seized through a process described internationally as extraordinary rendition. This was not a judicially sanctioned transfer but an act of state-sponsored abduction carried out with foreign collaboration.

By bypassing legal extradition procedures, the Nigerian government denied Kanu his constitutional guarantees: notice of proceedings, the right to legal representation, and the assurance of due process. His seizure was, in effect, the first violation of his right to fair hearing.

The Judicial Dilemma

In December 2023, the Supreme Court of Nigeria in FRN v. Nnamdi Kanu (SC/CR/1361/2022) acknowledged that Kanu’s rendition was illegal. Yet, instead of terminating the trial as demanded by law, the Court remitted the case back to the Federal High Court for continuation.

This decision presents grave implications.

Justice Cannot Rest on Illegality
The principle established in Madukolu v. Nkemdilim (1962) 2 SCNLR 341 at 348 is clear: for a court to be competent, a case must be properly constituted, within jurisdiction, and initiated in accordance with due process of law. Extraordinary rendition is the antithesis of due process. Any case founded on it collapses before it begins.
Civil Damages Are Not a Cure for Constitutional Breace
The Supreme Court’s suggestion that Kanu could seek damages trivializes the matter. In Ariori v. Elemo (1983) 1 SCNLR 1 at 9, the Court ruled that once fair hearing is denied, the entire proceedings are nullified no matter how fairly conducted. A constitutional violation cannot be compensated with money. The proper remedy is nullification, not financial settlement.
The Judiciary Must Not Validate Illegality
In Governor of Lagos State v. Ojukwu (1986) 1 NWLR (Pt. 18) 621 at 636, the Court held that the Constitution is anchored on the rule of law, and that courts must never condone illegality. By remitting Kanu’s case for trial despite admitting the illegality of his rendition, the Supreme Court risks turning itself into a willing participant in executive lawlessness.

Why This Matters Beyond Kanu

This case is not just about one man. It is about the integrity of Nigeria’s constitutional democracy. If the government can breach the Constitution with impunity and the courts condone it, then no Nigerian is safe. The right to fair hearing is the last line of defense for citizens against arbitrary power.

The Only Just Outcome

The supremacy of the Constitution demands that the proceedings against Kanu be declared a nullity. This is not about politics; it is about the survival of the rule of law. To do otherwise would embolden future governments to bypass legal processes, confident that the courts will eventually rubber-stamp their actions.

The judiciary must rise above political pressure and reassert its role as the guardian of justice. The Constitution, not the convenience of the Executive, must prevail.

Conclusion

Nnamdi Kanu’s case presents Nigeria with a defining moment: will the country uphold the Constitution, or will it allow expediency to override justice?

The only legal, just, and constitutional remedy is the nullification of the trial. This is the only way to safeguard the judiciary from complicity in illegality, protect the rule of law, and affirm that in Nigeria, no one not even the government stands above the Constitution.

Signed:

Christopher Chidera Esq.
Public Advocate & Human Rights Lawyer