Nnamdi Kanu: IPOB queries conviction after FG cross-appeal

The Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) has raised concerns regarding the Federal Government's cross-appeal in the case of its leader, Nnamdi Kanu. IPOB asserts that this legal maneuver undermines the foundation of Kanu's conviction and raises significant questions about the trial court's jurisdiction. The separatist group argues that the government's appeal implicitly concedes that the trial court lacked jurisdiction in certain aspects of the sentencing process, which, according to IPOB, renders the conviction invalid.

"Jurisdiction is not divisible. Jurisdiction is not a buffet. Jurisdiction is a continuum," stated IPOB spokesperson Emma Powerful. The group maintains that if a court acts without jurisdiction at the sentencing stage, the conviction itself cannot stand, as the two are legally intertwined. IPOB contends that the Court of Appeal must now determine if the conviction can be upheld given the Federal Government's stance on jurisdiction.

“

The implication is simple. Jurisdiction is not divisible. Jurisdiction is not a buffet. Jurisdiction is a continuum.

Furthermore, IPOB alleges that the trial was marred by numerous procedural irregularities. These include the use of repealed laws, denial of fair hearing, failure to disclose applicable statutes, and the withholding of evidence. IPOB believes these alleged defects collectively make the conviction legally unsustainable. The group has called upon the international community, legal practitioners, diplomats, and human rights organizations to closely observe the proceedings, characterizing the case as a critical test of Nigeria's commitment to established legal principles.

“

It would have to explain how a conviction can stand when the trial judge himself acknowledged that without a written law there can be no conviction.