Nnamdi Kanu: Supreme Court’s verdict ‘consistent with law’ - SAN Wahab Shittu

A Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN) Wahab Shittu said the verdict of the Supreme Court on Nnamdi Kanu is consistent with the law.

Shittu stated this in an interview on Channels Television’s Politics Today on Friday.

Recall that the apex court on Friday ruled that Kanu, the leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), should face trial despite a previous dismissal of charges by the Court of Appeal.

But Shittu noted that the Supreme Court was correct in stating that the process of bringing Kanu back to Nigeria was flawed.

He said, “The fact that the court has said that you have a case to answer is not conclusive on guilt. It’s saying: ‘Come and offer explanations to clear some grey areas’ in order to prove your innocence or guilt.

“Supreme Court has today said, ‘Go back and face your seven-count trial charge in respect of the seven-count charge’. What the Supreme Court has done is consistent with the law,” he added.

According to Shittu, this development does not detract from the fair hearing of the trial court.

The senior lawyer commended the Supreme Court for considering all issues on record and making informed pronouncements.

While highlighting the court’s examination of the question of illegal deportation, Shittu stressed on the importance of upholding the country’s image both locally and internationally.

Noting the Supreme Court’s stance on the revocation of bail, Shittu said the trial court was not entitled to revoke bail after Kanu fled for his life following security agencies’ invasion of his premises.

“The Supreme Court is a court of law and justice. At that level, all issues on record, everything will be considered. The Supreme Court examined all the issues and made pronouncements.

“They examined the question of illegal deportation and pronounced that that is clearly offensive and that henceforth our countries should be conscious of its image locally and internationally.

“When security agencies invade the premises of a suspect who is on bail, the trial court was not entitled to revoke the bail after the man fled for his life. On all issues, the Supreme Court has done justice to the matter.”

The Court’s judgment, delivered by Justice Emmanuel Agim, pointed out that the Court of Appeal was mistaken in ruling that Kanu could not be retried based on the alleged illegality of his arrest and the invasion of his home by the government.

Despite Kanu’s absence in court during the judgement, the Supreme Court established that the government’s actions, while reckless and unlawful, do not deprive the courts of the power to proceed with the trial for alleged criminal charges.

Kanu has been in detention since June 2021 and is facing charges of treasonable felony and terrorism.