A legal expert, Barrister Christopher Chidera, says the conviction of IPOB leader Nnamdi Kanu will be overturned at the Court of Appeal because it was based on a law that no longer exists.
Kanu was convicted of terrorism and sentenced to life imprisonment on November 20, 2025, by Justice James Omotosho of the Federal High Court, Abuja. He has since been transferred to the Sokoto Correctional Centre.
Kanu’s lawyers immediately vowed to challenge the ruling, and now Chidera insists the conviction is “dead on arrival” because the charges were filed under the Terrorism Prevention Amendment Act (TPAA) 2013 — a law repealed and replaced by the Terrorism (Prevention and Prohibition) Act (TPPA) 2022.
Chidera said the trial judge failed to take judicial notice of the repeal, which automatically invalidates all proceedings.
He argued that two principles of Nigerian law were violated:
- A repealed criminal law cannot be used to prosecute new offences.
- A judge must take judicial notice of existing laws and repeals.
According to him, these errors “kill jurisdiction,” making the entire trial void from the start.
He also dismissed government arguments relying on Section 98(3) of the TPPA as a “savings clause,” saying savings clauses only preserve past liabilities — they do not revive a repealed statute or authorize fresh trials.
Chidera cited several court decisions to support his argument, including Ojokolobo v Alamu, A.G. Lagos v Dosunmu, Uwaifo v A.G. Bendel, Mustapha v Governor of Lagos, and others, all affirming that once a law is repealed, it is “dead” and cannot be used for new proceedings.
He stressed that no appeal or Supreme Court decision in Nigeria or the Commonwealth has ever allowed a fresh criminal trial under a repealed law.
The lawyer said Justice Omotosho’s failure to acknowledge the repeal amounts to a “grave jurisdictional error,” referencing NNPC v Fawehinmi, which states that courts must take judicial notice of all laws, including repeals.
Chidera described the government’s reliance on Section 98(3) as “propaganda,” insisting the Court of Appeal will have no choice but to overturn the conviction.
“No appellate court — not even one acting under political instruction — can cure a jurisdictional nullity,” he said.
