The detained leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Mazi Nnamdi Kanu, has filed a fresh motion before the Federal High Court in Abuja, asking the court to strike out all charges against him and order his immediate release.
In the motion dated October 30, 2025, and titled “Motion on Notice and Written Address in Support,” Kanu argued that there is no valid charge against him under any law currently in force in Nigeria. He said the charges filed by the Federal Government are “a nullity from the beginning” because they are based on laws that no longer exist.
Kanu, who is representing himself, filed the motion under Sections 1(3), 6(6)(b), and 36(12) of the 1999 Constitution, as well as provisions of the Evidence Act 2011 and the Terrorism (Prevention and Prohibition) Act (TPPA) 2022.
He maintained that the government’s case against him relied on repealed and outdated laws, including the Customs and Excise Management Act (CEMA), which was replaced by the Nigeria Customs Service Act 2023, and the Terrorism Prevention (Amendment) Act 2013, which was repealed by the TPPA 2022.
According to Kanu, the continued use of such repealed laws violates Section 36(12) of the Constitution, which clearly states that a person cannot be tried for an offence that is not defined by an existing law. He therefore asked the court to dismiss the charges in their entirety, insisting that they do not represent any offence known to Nigerian law.
The IPOB leader further referred to the Supreme Court judgment in FRN v. Kanu (SC/CR/1361/2022), which, according to him, compels lower courts to take judicial notice of repealed laws as provided under Section 122 of the Evidence Act 2011. He said that any failure by the Federal High Court to do so would render all proceedings in his case invalid.
Kanu also argued that the alleged offences listed in the charges were said to have been committed in Kenya. He said this violates Section 76(1)(d)(iii) of the Terrorism (Prevention and Prohibition) Act 2022, which requires validation by a Kenyan court before any such acts can be tried in Nigeria.
He added that the failure to meet this requirement makes the court’s jurisdiction over the matter invalid and also breaches Article 7(2) of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, which guarantees fair hearing and due process.
Citing several past judgments, including Aoko v. Fagbemi (1961) 1 All NLR 400 and FRN v. Ifegwu (2003) 15 NWLR (Pt 842) 113, Kanu said that convictions or trials based on laws that no longer exist have been struck down in the past. He argued that his case falls into the same category and that the court must follow the same legal principle.
He also invoked Section 1(3) of the Constitution, which declares any law or government action inconsistent with the Constitution to be null and void. According to him, the charges against him are unconstitutional and must be struck out immediately.
Kanu urged the court to direct the prosecution to reply to his motion strictly on points of law within three days. He also requested that the court deliver its ruling on or before November 4, 2025.
He explained that his motion is purely based on constitutional and legal issues, and therefore does not require any affidavit or witness statement.
Nnamdi Kanu, the self-determined leader of IPOB, has been in detention since June 2021 after he was arrested abroad and returned to Nigeria under controversial circumstances. The Federal Government accuses him of treasonable felony and terrorism-related offences over his activities and broadcasts promoting the agitation for an independent Biafra nation.
Kanu and his supporters, however, insist that his arrest and continued detention are illegal, arguing that he was unlawfully abducted in Kenya and brought to Nigeria without proper extradition procedures.
Since his re-arrest, Kanu has filed several applications challenging the legality of his trial and the jurisdiction of the court. His legal team and supporters have consistently maintained that his case is politically motivated and violates his fundamental human rights.
The latest motion marks another twist in the long-running legal battle between the IPOB leader and the Nigerian government. The court is expected to hear and rule on the new application in the coming days.
If the court agrees with Kanu’s argument that the charges were filed under repealed laws, it could have far-reaching implications for the ongoing case and possibly lead to his release. However, the Federal Government is likely to oppose the motion, insisting that Kanu must face trial for his alleged offences.
