KANU:“Constitutional Earthquake Coming: Can a Court Deliver Judgment on a Non-Existent Crime?”— AVID
By Passman Akpos
A major constitutional showdown is looming at the Federal High Court, Abuja, as Justice James Omotosho prepares to deliver judgment on 20 November in a criminal matter that a prominent diaspora group says “has been legally dead for years.”
In a strongly worded statement issued on Monday, the American Veterans of Igbo Descent (AVID) condemned what it described as “a constitutional abomination dressed in judicial robes,” insisting that there is no valid charge presently pending against detained IPOB leader Mazi Nnamdi Kanu.
A “Non-Existent” Count Revived?
At the heart of the controversy is Count 7, a charge that AVID claims is a mere renumbered version of Count 15, which the Supreme Court of Nigeria struck out on 15 December 2023 after ruling bluntly:
> “The offence as laid does not exist in the body of our laws… Count 15 is incompetent and is hereby struck out.”
According to AVID, the prosecution never amended or reframed the count under the correct statute — the Customs and Excise Management Act (CEMA) — despite the Supreme Court’s explicit direction.
Instead, they allege, prosecutors “simply renumbered the corpse” and required Kanu to take a fresh plea on 29 March 2025, a move the group describes as a deliberate violation of constitutional due process.
Charges Under a Repealed Law
The remaining six counts are filed under the Terrorism (Prevention) Act 2011, amended in 2013 — a law repealed and replaced on 12 May 2022 by the National Assembly.
Under Section 36(12) of the 1999 Constitution, no Nigerian court may try any citizen for an offence not defined in a law currently in force.
AVID argues that this makes the entire case “a legal impossibility.”
> “A repealed law is not in force. A count declared non-existent by the Supreme Court is not a charge. A man detained for years on such a charge is a hostage, not an accused person,” the group stated.
UK Accused of “Active Complicity”
In an unprecedented escalation, AVID also accused the United Kingdom, Kanu’s country of citizenship, of “silence that has crossed the line into active complicity.”
The statement cites Britain’s historic role in developing the principle of legality — from Lord Camden (1765) to William Blackstone (1769), A.V. Dicey (1885) and Lord Bingham (2010) — arguing that the UK cannot claim ignorance of the rule it “authored, exported, and embedded into modern human-rights law.”
AVID asserts that the UK’s refusal to intervene amounts to:
abandonment of its own citizen
abandonment of its own legal heritage
abandonment of the rule of law
> “This silence is no longer negligence. It is an endorsement — a diplomatic green light for persecution,” the group charged.
All Eyes on November 20
AVID says the court has no jurisdiction to proceed and is urging Justice Omotosho to strike out the case entirely.
> “There is no valid charge before Justice Omotosho. Anything short of striking out the entire charge is judicial rebellion against the Constitution.”
The group warned that the world is watching, calling out institutions from the Nigerian Presidency to the International Criminal Court, UN Human Rights bodies, the US State Department, and global legal associations.
The statement was signed by:
Dr. Sylvester OnyiaPresident, American Veterans of Igbo Descent (AVID)17 November 2025.
With tensions rising across legal, diplomatic, and political circles, the ruling on 20 November 2025 is widely expected to become a defining moment for Nigeria’s justice system — and for international observers monitoring the case.
