WELCOME TO KTNBIO

The American Military Veterans of Igbo Descent, AVID, has reiterated its call for an unconditional release of the leader of Indigenous People of Biafra, IPOB, Nnamdi Kanu.

The IPOB leader is currently detained in the custody of Department of State Service, DSS.

AVID said Kanu’s matter has gone from judicial to political, adding that its within the executive prerogatives of the President to order for his immediate release.

The military veterans made the call in an open letter addressed to Tinubu. The letter is dated 26th February 2025, and titled, ‘Open letter to the President and Government of Nigeria’.

The letter was signed by Chief Dr. Sylvester Onyia and Dr. Godson Obiagwu, President and Secretary of the group, respectively.

The letter made reference to the pronouncent made by the Federal High Court on 26th October 2022, which held that “the manner of arrest and detention of the Applicant (Mazi Nnamdi Kanu) in Kenya, his continued detention in Abuja, his subjection to physical and mental trauma by the Respondents, the inhuman and degrading treatment meted out to the Applicant amounts to a brazen violation of the Applicant’s fundamental right to dignity of his person and threat to life under Section 34 (1)(a) of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended)”.

The letter added, “By the plain interpretation of this judicial pronouncement, the further detention of Mr. Kanu after the issuance of this judgment has become arbitrary because the Government of Nigeria has a binding obligation to free him by virtue of the provisions of Section 287(3) of the Nigerian Constitution which states that: “The decisions of the Federal High Court, a High Court and of all other courts established by this Constitution shall be enforced in any part of the Federation by all authorities and persons, and by other courts of law with subordinate jurisdiction to that of the Federal High Court, a High Court and those other courts, respectively.”

AVID insisted that the Nigerian government does not need any further judicial process or court order to implement the decision of the Federal High Court.

“In December 2023, the Supreme Court of Nigeria (despite its remission of Mr. Kanu’s case to Nigeria’s Federal High Court for trial) decided against his initial detention, stating, inter alia, that: “The respondent (Mr. Kanu) was on bail and therefore in custody of the law when his home was illegally invaded by heavily armed military officers of the appellant (Federal Republic of Nigeria) causing him to flee from his home and the country to secure his life. In the face of such an attack, it was responsible for him to flee to secure his life and physical well-being. That is what any normal and reasonable human being would do in that circumstance to preserve his life and physical well-being. It is glaring that the consequences of that attack were intended or foreseeable. This is not arguable.

“The appellant’s officials knew that their invasion of the respondent’s home caused him to tun away to secure his life and physical well-being.

“Yet during proceedings in the pending criminal case against him, they applied that his bail be revoked, that a warrant for his arrest be issued and his sureties forfeit their respective bail bond and that his trial in his absence be ordered because he had jumped bail and is not in court to stand his trial. But they knew that their illegal actions made it impossible for the respondent to be in court for his trial.

“In a situation such as this one, where the prosecution has taken extrajudicial actions against the defendant in a pending criminal case brought by it and made it impossible for the defendant who is on bail to be in court for his or her trial, it is wrong to treat such a defendant as having jumped bail in the sense that he is running from prosecution or running to avoid prosecution in the pending criminal case in respect of which he was granted bail,” AVID said.

The letter added, “The respondent did not intentionally and knowingly fail to appear in court. It was therefore wrong and malicious for the appellant that had cause the respondent to flee from his home and country to secure his life and that had therefore caused his unavoidable absence from court, to inform and thereby deceived the trial court that the respondent had jumped bail.

“On the basis of this deception, the appellant applied to the trial court for an order revoking the respondent’s bail, forfeiting the amount securing the bail bond of his sureties and an order issuing a bench warrant for his arrest. It is glaring from the record of the proceedings in the trial court that it granted the said orders prayed for by the appellant with knowledge of the fact that the respondent’s absence from court was caused by the invasion of his home by army officers of the appellant.

“Therefore, the trial court knew that the said extra judicial and illegal actions of the appellant made it impossible for the respondent to be in court for his trial, that the respondent’s absence is not intentional or deliberate absence and that the respondent is not running from prosecution or running to avoid prosecution. In the light of the foregoing, the trial court acted unfairly and without rational and legal justifiable basis by its decisions revoking the respondent’s bail, forfeiting the amount securing the bail bond of his sureties and its order issuing a bench warrant for his arrest.

“The orders were made on the basis of the false assumption that the respondent jumped bail. It was on the basis of the order of arrest of the respondent obtained under the false pretense that he jumped bail that his extradition or rendition from Kenya was carried out.

“On 19th January, 2022, the High Court of Abia consequently rendered a judgment in favor of MAZI NNAMDI KANU, stating that: “The issue of the military invasion of [MAZI NNAMDI KANU’s] residential abode and premises at Isiama Afaraukwu Ibeku, Abia State on 10th September, 2017 by agents of [GOVERNMENT OF NIGERIA] is so notorious and common knowledge that this Honorable Court cannot turn a blind eye to it. I am satisfied that [MAZI NNAMDI KANU] has proved the violation of his fundamental rights to dignity of human person, personal liberty and attempted violation of his right to life by [GOVERNMENT OF NIGERIA] and or its agents and none of the Respondents in this Suit has shown any real justification for such conduct. It is the view of this Honorable Court that the Agent of the [GOVERNMENT OF NIGERIA] set out as pythons to terminate the life of the [MAZI NNAMDI KANU]. In view of the foregoing the [MAZI NNAMDI KANU’s]
Relief 1 and 7 succeed and it is hereby granted as prayed. The Applicant deserves an apology as prayed.” In its wisdom, the Court also stated that: “That the [GOVERNMENT OF NIGERIA] is urged to show commitment to a peaceful resolution to the matter.”

“On the strength of the foregoing, we hereby strongly urge the Government of Nigeria headed by His Excellency, President Ahmed Bola Tinubu to, without further ado, direct that MAZI NNAMDI KANU be released, either on the restoration of his unlawfully revoked bail or on a constitutional discontinuance of his prosecution.

“Suffice it to say, that there is no gainsaying that this matter has transformed from the legal or judicial to the political, which is within the executive province and prerogatives of President Tinubu. And as the saying goes, the buck stops at the President’s table.”