Skip to main content

NJC Denies Order For Release Of Nnamdi Kanu, Move To Return IPOB Leader To Kenya

 C
March 20, 2025

In a statement issued on Thursday in Abuja and signed by its Deputy Director of Information, Kemi Ogedengbe, the NJC described the claim as a fabrication.

 

The National Judicial Council (NJC) of Nigeria has denied reports that the Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN) ordered the release of Nnamdi Kanu and his repatriation to Kenya.

 

In a statement issued on Thursday in Abuja and signed by its Deputy Director of Information, Kemi Ogedengbe, the NJC described the claim as a fabrication.

The statement clarified that the report was false and entirely baseless, as no such court proceedings, decisions, or judgments had been issued by the Chief Justice. 

It further stated that the CJN did not preside over any case involving Kanu at the apex court, nor did she make any pronouncement regarding his release or repatriation.

The NJC also emphasised that the CJN never sent a formal letter to the Kenyan government or its High Commission apologising for Kanu’s arrest or trial. It urged the public to disregard the false report.

 

 

 

The statement read, “The attention of the National Judicial Council has been drawn to media reports that the Chief Justice of Nigeria and Chairman of the Council, Hon. Justice Kudirat Motonmori Olatokunbo Kekere-Ekun, has ordered the release of the detained Nnamdi Kanu and his repatriation to Kenya.”

 

“The council wishes to state that the media report is false and a figment of the writer’s imagination, as there are no court proceedings, decisions, or judgments where such statements ascribed to His Lordship were made.”

Nnamdi Kanu, leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), has filed multiple lawsuits challenging the violation of his constitutional rights, including his right to a fair and speedy trial.

 

Kanu, through his legal team led by his Special Counsel, Barrister Aloy Ejimakor, has urged the court and the Nigerian government to adhere to constitutional provisions in handling his case. 

In the first lawsuit, filed under Suit No. CV/875/25, Kanu seeks an unconditional release from detention and a halt to his ongoing trial in Charge No. FHC/ABJ/CR/383/2015. His lawyers argue that his trial violates Section 36(1) and (4) of the Nigerian Constitution, which guarantees the right to a fair and speedy trial.

In addition to his release, Kanu is demanding a formal apology from the Nigerian government for the alleged violation of his fundamental rights, to be published in three widely circulated national newspapers. He is also seeking compensation of N100 billion for the alleged physical, mental, and emotional trauma caused by his prolonged detention and legal proceedings.

 

In a second lawsuit, numbered M/3224/2025, Kanu is seeking a writ of mandamus compelling Nigerian authorities to follow due legal process in his trial. He specifically requests the transfer of his case to the South-East, arguing that it should have been filed there from the outset.

 

Meanwhile, SaharaReporters has reported that, following these legal proceedings, the Chief Judge of the Federal High Court, Justice John Tsoho, reassigned Kanu’s case to another judge.

 

Kanu’s lawyer, Aloy Ejimakor, confirmed this development on Saturday, noting that Kanu was prepared to face trial because he was confident of his innocence.

 

Ejimakor stated that before visiting Kanu, the legal team received two official letters regarding the case. 

One letter was from the Chief Justice of Nigeria, responding to the legal team’s request for administrative intervention concerning the reassignment of Kanu’s case following the recusal of the previous judge. The second letter was from the Chief Judge of the Federal High Court, informing them that the case had been reassigned to another judge.

“Following this, Kanu instructed his legal team to publicly express his gratitude to the Chief Justice of Nigeria for her prompt administrative intervention. He also extended his appreciation to the general public for their support in ensuring that his case was reassigned to another judge as required by law,” the statement read.