UK Govt Silent, Complicit As Nigeria Defies Courts, UN Over Nnamdi Kanu's Detention—IPOB

UK Govt Silent, Complicit As Nigeria Defies Courts, UN Over Nnamdi Kanu’s Detention—IPOB

In a press release signed by its Media and Publicity Secretary, Emma Powerful, IPOB condemned what it described as the UK’s “continued silence and apparent complicity” in the face of multiple legal rulings that have declared Kanu’s arrest and detention unlawful.

The Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) has accused the United Kingdom government of complicity in the “illegal abduction, extraordinary rendition, and prolonged detention” of its leader, Nnamdi Kanu, a Nigerian-British citizen, by the Nigerian government.

“Mazi Nnamdi Kanu was abducted in Kenya in June 2021 in a state-sponsored criminal act of extraordinary rendition and forcibly returned to Nigeria without any extradition proceedings,” the statement read.

IPOB said the act violated several legal instruments, including Section 15 of Nigeria’s Extradition Act, Article 12(4) of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, and Articles 9 and 14 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR).

According to IPOB, “three judicial forums in Nigeria, Kenya, and at the UN level have all concluded that Nnamdi Kanu’s fundamental rights were trampled.”

According to IPOB, these include a 2022 opinion by the United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, which found Kanu’s detention illegal and called for his release and compensation and a ruling by the Kenyan High Court declaring Kanu’s abduction on Kenyan soil unconstitutional and awarding damages.

IPOB also recalled an October 2022 judgment by the Nigerian Court of Appeal, which held that the extraordinary rendition constituted a fundamental violation of Nigerian law, thereby nullifying proceedings against him and a Federal High Court sitting in Umuahia, Abia state, which also awarded Kanu N500 million in damages in 2022 over similar violations.

Despite these rulings, IPOB lamented that the British government has neither taken diplomatic steps nor publicly condemned the actions of the Nigerian authorities.

“This is in stark contradiction to its own principled reaction in the Dikko Affair (1984),” the group said, referring to the attempted kidnapping of former Nigerian minister Umaru Dikko in London, which triggered a diplomatic crisis and sanctions.

Quoting the Nigerian Supreme Court’s decision in Dikko v. The State (1987), IPOB recalled that Justice Karibi-Whyte declared: “The trial of an accused person who has been brought before the court in violation of international law and without compliance with extradition procedures is a nullity. Jurisdiction cannot be conferred upon the court by illegality.”

IPOB accused the UK government of “betraying the very principles it once stood for” by refusing to take action in Kanu’s case.

“British silence in this case is not neutrality, it is complicity,” the group stated.

IPOB further argued that the charges against Kanu, described mainly as related to political broadcasts, were allegedly committed in the United Kingdom and are not crimes under UK law.

Citing Section 76 of Nigeria’s Terrorism (Prevention and Prohibition) Act 2022, IPOB maintained that Nigerian courts lack jurisdiction without evidence that the acts were also criminal in the UK, under the principle of double criminality.

IPOB demanded that the UK government “Publicly condemn the extraordinary rendition and continuing detention of our leader Mazi Nnamdi Kanu” and “invoke diplomatic and legal mechanisms to demand his immediate and unconditional release”.

It also asked the UK government to “clarify its position to the British Parliament and public on how it justifies inaction where a British citizen is illegally abducted, tortured, and indefinitely detained in breach of international law.”

“The UK must choose between its stated commitment to human rights and the rule of law, and its political convenience in shielding a rogue state. It cannot do both,” the group said.

Source: Sahara reporters