Three Igbo advocacy groups based in the United States have raised concerns over what they termed grave procedural flaws in the recent Federal High Court judgment involving the leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra, Mazi Nnamdi Kanu.
In a joint statement issued on Friday and obtained by THE WHISTLER, the American Veterans of Igbo Descent, Ambassadors for Self Determination and the Rising Sun Foundation alleged that the ruling contained significant breaches capable of undermining fair hearing and constitutional protections.
The statement was signed by Dr Sylvester Onyia for AVID, President Benson Nwankwo for Ambassadors for Self Determination and Mazi Maxwell Dede for Rising Sun Foundation.
The groups said they were drawing the attention of Nigerians, the international community and legal stakeholders to what they described as “two grave procedural breaches” that jeopardise the integrity of the judicial process.
“We issue this statement to alert all institutions committed to democratic governance that two grave procedural breaches occurred in the recent judgment involving Mazi Nnamdi Kanu,” the groups said.
“These breaches undermine the pillars of fair hearing, constitutional order and the integrity of the Nigerian justice system.”
They alleged that the court relied on allegations contained in a charge that had previously been struck out, including counts dismissed during preliminary hearings, such as the accusation linking Kanu to public property destruction during the EndSARS protests.
“A struck-out count ceases to exist in the eyes of the law,” the statement read. “It cannot be revisited or used to form the basis of any conviction. Yet this allegation appeared in the reasoning that led to the conviction. No defendant may be convicted on an allegation not properly before the court,” they argued.
The organisations further claimed that the defence team was denied the opportunity to file a final written address despite being told earlier in the trial to reserve objections for that stage, insisting the development amounted to a denial of constitutional rights.
“Throughout the proceedings, the judge repeatedly instructed the defence to raise its objections in the final written address,” they said.
“However, when the time came to file that address, the court foreclosed the defence and proceeded directly to deliver judgment.”
They maintained that such an action infringes upon the right to be heard, urging Nigerians and legal experts to scrutinise the Certified True Copies of the proceedings.
“Anyone who reads the record will see how, step by step, the handling of the case departed from established legal procedure and sidelined constitutional safeguards,” they said.
The groups called for a thorough examination of the issues raised, warning that public trust in the justice system relies on fairness, openness and strict adherence to due process.
“For the sake of justice and Nigeria’s democratic credibility, these issues must not be ignored.
“They demand scrutiny, accountability and corrective action,” the statement added.
