“The Abuja bench should reply one unassailable query: When did an unappealed, procedurally faulty, ex parte administrative order change the constitutional requirement to show a particular crime beneath a legitimate written legislation?”
Stressing {that a} court docket had declared IPOB’s proscription unlawful, Chidera identified that, on March 2, 2017, Justice Binta Nyako struck out six counts in opposition to Nnamdi Kanu, ruling that IPOB was not an illegal society.
Chidera, whereas insisting that an ex parte order just isn’t a judicial clean cheque, added, “Under Order 26, Rule 12 of the Federal High Court Rules, an ex parte order is a brief emergency measure with a strict 14-day lifespan. Transforming a two-week interim procedural order right into a everlasting, 20-12 months penal entice violates primary civil process and Section 36 of the 1999 Constitution.
“Status just isn’t conduct: Proscription regulates an organisation’s administrative standing; it’s not proof of particular person guilt. An government label doesn’t relieve the state of proving an overt legal act in opposition to a residing defendant.”
According to him, the 22-floor appellant transient filed by Nnamdi Kanu in opposition to his conviction challenged the premise of the proscription.
Stating that the declaration lacks presidential authority, he mentioned, “The proscription order failed to fulfill primary statutory conditions — a precept strengthened by Justice James Omotosho himself in MultiChoice Nigeria Ltd v. FCCPC, the place he held that statutory powers vested in a particular authority can’t be bypassed or assumed with out express compliance with situation precedents.
“Ex Parte can’t defeat inter partes. A closed-door administrative order can’t override an current, binding judgment. Rushing decrease courts to hand down most sentences whereas the Supreme Court is actively seized of the proscription’s legality proves the regime is in a frantic race to silence dissent earlier than its authorized home of playing cards collapses.
“Justice James Omotosho’s November 20, 2025 judgment in opposition to Nnamdi Kanu set a lawless precedent by convicting him beneath the Terrorism (Prevention) (Amendment) Act 2013—a statute expressly repealed by the 2022 Act.
“Now, Justice Hauwa Yilwa has recycled that actual constitutional illegality to sentence Paul Okechukwu to 20 years in jail beneath Section 16 of the identical useless 2013 Act.”
Insisting that affiliation just isn’t terrorism, Chidera famous that when prosecutors dropped the violent assault rely in opposition to Paul Okechukwu and proceeded solely on “membership,” they admitted that they had zero proof of violence.
“Jailing a human being for twenty years for mere affiliation—indifferent from any confirmed act of violence—is judicial violence,” he added.
The lawyer due to this fact warned Igbo youths who’re presently in detention over alleged IPOB membership in opposition to pleading responsible beneath coercion.
He mentioned, “To each Igbo youth and Biafran activist languishing within the infamous Wawa Barracks or different secret detention services throughout the nation: Do not succumb to psychological torture, hunger, or isolation by pleading responsible to crimes you didn’t commit.
“The state’s technique is straightforward: break your spirit by means of indefinite, inhumane detention till a 20-12 months jail sentence looks like a reduction in contrast to their dungeons. A coerced plea just isn’t freedom—it’s a entice that legalises your torment and cements your imprisonment.
“Hold the road: Desperation doesn’t validate a false confession, and psychological coercion voids any responsible plea beneath Section 36 of the Constitution. Demand authorized entry: Refuse to signal pre-drafted admissions or settle for plea bargains with out unbiased, uncoerced authorized counsel.
“Force the state to show its case: An government designation just isn’t proof of particular person guilt. Make the prosecution discharge its heavy constitutional burden beneath a legitimate written legislation.”
He raised 5 questions for the courts, stating, “How can the state depend on an ex parte order whereas ignoring Justice Nyako’s binding inter partes ruling that IPOB is lawful? By what constitutional logic does a 14-day interim order grow to be a everlasting presumption of legal guilt? How can a conviction delivered beneath a repealed statute fulfill Section 36(12) of the Constitution? Where is the written legislation changing peaceable advocacy or Biafran identification right into a 20-12 months terrorist offence? What particular, overt act of violence did Paul Okechukwu commit to justify stealing 20 years of his life?”
The lawyer famous {that a} choose’s robe doesn’t elevate him above the Constitution, including that labelling a motion “terrorist” doesn’t droop human rights.
According to him, the Constitution stays supreme and the legislation should prevail over political intimidation.
