The IPOB Leader's Case And The Dare On Nigerian Judiciary's Courage And Independence

  The IPOB Leader's Case And The Dare On Nigerian Judiciary's Courage And Independence 

Nnamdi Kanu

The case of Mazi Nnamdi Kanu, leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) has highly tested the courage and independence of the judiciary of Nigeria. The process so far has raised fundamental questions about the foundation and constitutionality of Nigeria, as well as the integrity and impartiality of the judicial system.

In this article, we will examine the issues raised by the case of Mazi Nnamdi Kanu and the implications it has for the judiciary and the broader Nigeria state.

The IPOB leader was first arrested in October 2015 and charged with treasonable felony. He was later granted bail in April 2017, but his bail conditions were later varied and he was declared a fugitive when he failed to appear in court for his trial, following the bloody military invasion of his home in Afara-Ukwu, Ibeku, Abia State. In June 2021, Kanu was again abducted in Kenya by the agents of Nigerian secret police, in collaboration with their Kenyan counterparts, and illegally renditioned back to Nigeria to face trial.

This very trial has raised so much controversy, with Kanu supporters alleging that he is being persecuted for his political views and his advocacy for the secession of Biafra from Nigeria. The Nigeria government on the other hand, accuses the IPOB leader of inciting violence and destabilizing the country. And so, the government have blatantly ignored the rulings of competent courts that favoured Kanu, as a result. 

These blantancy of the government to courts orders and the equal inaction from the judiciary, have raised fundamental questions; ranging from the independence of the judiciary, the respect for rule of law in Nigeria, and the constitutional foundation of the country. It has also exposed the fault lines in the country's fragile unity and the need for a more inclusive and equitable political system.

One of the most important principles of any democratic society is the independence of the judiciary. The judiciary is supposed to be impartial and free from external influence or pressure, and its decisions oughts to be unapologetically based on the dictates of the law and the evidence presented in court.

This single case of Mazi Nnamdi Kanu has tested all of the above listed due quality of the judiciary, on the Nigerian judicial system. Kanu's supporters have alleged that the government is putting pressure on the judiciary to convict their leader, while the government has accused the judiciary of being biased in Kanu's favor. The judiciary on its part, has failed to consistently maintain its claimed independence from the executive, and impartiality. There have been concerns about the integrity of the legal system. For example, Kanu's initial bail conditions were widely seen as excessive and punitive, and his abduction in June 2021 was carried out in a controversial manner that raised questions about due process, yet the judiciary is weak to appropriately intervene in the matter.

The rule of law is another fundamental principle of any democratic society. It means that everyone, regardless of their status or position, is subject to the same laws and legal procedures. It also means that the government must follow the law and respect the rights of individuals. But the IPOB leader's case has raised so much serious unrest is because, Nigeria government is deliberately flouting its own laws. Kanu's supporters have accused the government of violating Kanu's rights and defying due process. 

Amongst others, the case of Mazi Nnamdi Kanu has also raised fundamental questions about the constitutional foundations of Nigeria. The country was created in 1914 by the British colonial government, and it has struggled to maintain its forced unity and stability, ever since creation. Notwithstanding, the issue of secession has been a contentious one in Nigeria, with various regions and ethnic groups seeking greater autonomy or even independence. The case of Mazi Nnamdi Kanu and his advocacy for the secession of Biafra has has just further highlighted the deep divisions within the country and the absence of inclusive and equitable political system.

The Nigerian Constitution guarantees freedom of speech, association, and the right to self-determination. And there is a fine line between exercising these rights and inciting violence or threatening national security. The Mazi Nnamdi Kanu led IPOB have remained within this boundary and continued to press that Nigeria government addresses the underlying grievances of marginalized groups and find ways to address their concerns within the framework of the constitution.

These facts, and more, are why the case of Mazi Nnamdi Kanu has significant implications for the judiciary and the Nigerian state. The judiciary needs to ensure that it uphold the rule of law and the independence of the judiciary. The judiciary must rise to its constitutional responsibility and prevail on Nigeria government's administrative branch to  free Mazi Nnamdi Kanu and address the underlying grievances of marginalized groups, within the framework of the constitution.

The case of Mazi Nnamdi Kanu is a test of Nigeria's commitment to democracy, the rule of law, and the principles of human rights.

Written Chidiebere Obulose

Edited by Ogah C S Maduabuchi 

For Family Writers Press International