Summary Critique of What Happened in Court on 23 October 2025
What happened before Justice Omotosho was another proof that Mazi Nnamdi Kanu is not being given justice but persecution.
1. Ignoring the Appeal Court’s Discharge
The Court of Appeal already discharged and acquitted Mazi Nnamdi Kanu in October 2022.
The Supreme Court never set that discharge aside — it only said the case could be retried if the Government so wished.
It did not order his continued detention.
Therefore, keeping him locked up since then is a clear act of contempt against the appellate judgment.
In law, a party in contempt is not entitled to be heard or benefit from the court until the contempt is purged.
As stated in Hadkinson v. Hadkinson (1952) 2 All ER 567, “a person in contempt cannot be heard until he obeys the order.”
The DSS cannot disobey the Court of Appeal’s order of release and at the same time ask another court to try him.
2. Refusal to Hear Objection on Jurisdiction
In court, Kanu boldly told Justice Omotosho:
“I will not be tried under a repealed, dead law.”
He was right.
The Terrorism (Prevention Amendment) Act 2013 and CEMA 2004, under which he is being charged, were repealed by the Terrorism Prevention and Prohibition Act 2022.
A repealed law cannot support a valid trial.
Yet, the judge refused to hear his objection on jurisdiction, saying it would be taken after the trial.
That position turns the law upside down — a court must first decide if it has jurisdiction before taking any other step.
Otherwise, everything done becomes a nullity.
3. No Fair Hearing or Lawyer Access
Kanu told the court that his meetings with his lawyers are monitored and recorded by the DSS, which destroys the confidentiality guaranteed by Section 36 of the Constitution.
Instead of addressing this violation, the judge dismissed it, saying Kanu’s only fair hearing was to “call his witnesses.”
That is not how the law defines fair hearing — it starts with free access to counsel and an unbiased court, not with forced participation in a sham process.
4. Forged Medical Report
Kanu also complained that the medical report presented by the DSS was forged.
Instead of ordering an investigation, the judge said he would stand by the report because it was once accepted by his former lawyer, Chief Kanu Agabi, SAN.
That statement means the court knowingly chose to rely on a forged document.
No court should ever condone forgery — it offends both justice and the judicial oath.
5. What It All Means
The 23 October 2025 hearing showed a pattern of bias and deliberate injustice:
The government remains in contempt but is still entertained.
The judge refused to decide whether the law even allows the trial.
The defendant’s right to counsel and fair hearing is trampled.
A forged report is brushed aside.
This is not a trial; it is persecution dressed up as procedure.
Until the Government obeys the Court of Appeal order and releases Mazi Nnamdi Kanu, no court has moral or legal authority to continue this charade.
You cannot break the law and then ask the law to protect you.
Onyedikachi Ifedi, Esq