As long as Nnamdi Kanu is in Nigeria through forceful abduction, no court case against him by govt can stand--Lawyers

 As long as Nnamdi Kanu is in Nigeria through forceful abduction, no court case against him by govt can stand--Lawyers   THE Igbo Lawyers As...

 As long as Nnamdi Kanu is in Nigeria through forceful abduction, no court case against him by govt can stand--Lawyers  

THE Igbo Lawyers Association on Friday said the Federal Government could no longer hold the leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra, Nnamdi Kanu, in custody following the Abuja Appeal Court’s ruling in his trial.

 The appellate court held that the government flouted the Anti-Terrorism Act and violated all known international conventions and Treaties guiding extradition process, thus breaching the rights of the defendant.

 The court further held that having illegally and forcefully renditioned Nnamdi Kanu, the government could not prosecute him.

 But the Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Abubakar Malami, said Kanu was merely discharged and not acquitted, adding that the government would pursue other legal options.

However, the ILA Coordinator and immediate past Vice-Chairman, Nigeria Bar Association, Aba branch, Mr Victor Onweremmadu, said the AGF’s view on the matter was wrong and could amount to contempt of court. 

He said, “You cannot build something on nothing, it will crumble and that is what Malami is doing. He started on the wrong footing and the court is saying he can’t continue, but he is saying that he must.

 “That is wrong and can amount to contempt of court arising from disobedience to court judgment. As long as Nnamdi Kanu is in Nigeria through that forceful abduction, there can be no more trial on the matter because the trial court is barred.”

Onweremmadu said holding Kanu in custody defied known laws as even an appeal to a higher court did not amount to stay of execution.

 Onweremmadu,  a member of the General Council of the Bar also said the legal process of stay of execution applied only in civil matters but not in criminal matters, hence no basis to continue holding the appellant.