The embattled leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Mazi Nnamdi Kanu, has filed a fresh motion before the Federal High Court in Abuja, seeking the dismissal of all charges filed against him by the Federal Government and his immediate release.
In the motion dated October 30, 2025, and titled “Motion on Notice and Written Address in Support,” Kanu argued that there is no valid or extant legal basis for his ongoing prosecution.
He described the case as “a nullity ab initio” (void from the beginning) and urged the court to strike out all the counts, contending that they violate constitutional and procedural law.
Naijaonpoint reports that Kanu, who represented himself in the fresh filing, said his trial offends Sections 1(3), 6(6)(b), and 36(12) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended), alongside relevant provisions of the Evidence Act 2011 and the Terrorism (Prevention and Prohibition) Act 2022.
He maintained that the prosecution’s reliance on repealed laws, including the Customs and Excise Management Act (CEMA), replaced by the Nigeria Customs Service Act 2023, and the Terrorism Prevention (Amendment) Act 2013, which has been repealed by the TPPA 2022, renders the entire process invalid.
“There is no valid charge against me under any existing law in Nigeria,” Kanu argued. “The prosecution is relying on repealed and non-existent laws. The charges are a nullity ab initio for want of any extant legal foundation.”
The IPOB leader cited the Supreme Court’s decision in FRN v. Kanu (SC/CR/1361/2022), insisting that lower courts are bound to take judicial notice of repealed statutes under Section 122 of the Evidence Act 2011.
He argued that any failure to do so would make all subsequent proceedings void and unconstitutional.
“Once a law has been repealed, no court of law can continue to rely on it. Such proceedings offend Section 36(12) of the Constitution, which forbids the trial of a citizen for an offence not defined under an existing law,” Kanu stated.
Kanu further contended that the alleged offences were said to have occurred in Kenya, outside Nigeria’s territorial jurisdiction.
Relying on Section 76(1)(d)(iii) of the Terrorism (Prevention and Prohibition) Act 2022, he said such acts require validation by a Kenyan court before a Nigerian court can assume jurisdiction.
According to him, the omission violates Article 7(2) of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights and nullifies the court’s extraterritorial jurisdiction in his case.
Kanu maintained that any judicial act or legislation inconsistent with the Constitution is void under Sections 1(3) and 36(12) of the 1999 Constitution.
He cited landmark decisions, including Aoko v. Fagbemi (1961) 1 All NLR 400 and FRN v. Ifegwu (2003) 15 NWLR (Pt. 842) 113, where convictions were nullified for being founded on non-existent laws.
“The Constitution remains the supreme law of the land,” Kanu said. “Any act done or decision taken in violation of its provisions is null and void.”
In his motion, Kanu urged the court to compel the prosecution to respond strictly on points of law within three days and for the presiding judge to deliver a ruling on or before November 4, 2025.
He emphasised that his application raised pure questions of law and constitutional interpretation, hence did not require any supporting affidavit.
“My application is strictly legal and constitutional. It involves no factual controversy that would require an affidavit,” he wrote in the motion.
Kanu has been in the custody of the Department of State Services (DSS) since his re-arrest in 2021 after fleeing the country.
He is facing multiple counts bordering on treasonable felony, terrorism, and incitement, charges he has consistently dismissed as politically motivated and legally defective.
The court is expected to fix a date for the hearing of the new motion, which may determine whether the long-running trial continues or collapses under the weight of the constitutional objections now raised by the IPOB leader.
© 2025 Naijaonpoint, a division of NOP Media Inc. Contact us via [email protected]