“The Abuja bench must answer one unassailable question: When did an unappealed, procedurally defective, ex parte administrative order replace the constitutional requirement to prove a specific crime under a valid written law?”
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 isn’t a judicial clean cheque, added, “Under Order 26, Rule 12 of the Federal High Court Rules, an ex parte order is a temporary emergency measure with a strict 14-day lifespan. Transforming a two-week interim procedural order into a permanent, 20-year penal trap violates basic civil procedure and Section 36 of the 1999 Constitution.
“Status isn’t conduct: Proscription regulates an organisation’s administrative standing; it isn’t proof of particular person guilt. An government label doesn’t relieve the state of proving an overt legal act in opposition to a dwelling defendant.”
According to him, the 22-ground appellant brief filed by Nnamdi Kanu against his conviction challenged the basis of the proscription.
Stating that the declaration lacks presidential authority, he said, “The proscription order failed to fulfill primary statutory conditions — a precept bolstered by Justice James Omotosho himself in MultiChoice Nigeria Ltd v. FCCPC, the place he held that statutory powers vested in a selected authority can’t be bypassed or assumed with out express compliance with situation precedents.
“Ex Parte cannot defeat inter partes. A closed-door administrative order cannot override an existing, binding judgment. Rushing lower courts to hand down maximum sentences while the Supreme Court is actively seized of the proscription’s legality proves the regime is in a frantic race to silence dissent before its legal house of cards collapses.
“Justice James Omotosho’s November 20, 2025 judgment in opposition to Nnamdi Kanu set a lawless precedent by convicting him underneath the Terrorism (Prevention) (Amendment) Act 2013—a statute expressly repealed by the 2022 Act.
“Now, Justice Hauwa Yilwa has recycled that exact constitutional illegality to sentence Paul Okechukwu to 20 years in prison under Section 16 of the same dead 2013 Act.”
Insisting that affiliation isn’t terrorism, Chidera famous that when prosecutors dropped the violent assault depend in opposition to Paul Okechukwu and proceeded solely on “membership,” they admitted they’d zero proof of violence.
“Jailing a human being for two decades for mere association—detached from any proven 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 underneath coercion.
He mentioned, “To every Igbo youth and Biafran activist languishing in the notorious Wawa Barracks or other secret detention facilities across the country: Do not succumb to psychological torture, starvation, or isolation by pleading guilty to crimes you did not commit.
“The state’s technique is easy: break your spirit via indefinite, inhumane detention till a 20-yr jail sentence looks like a reduction in contrast to their dungeons. A coerced plea isn’t freedom—it’s a lure that legalises your torment and cements your imprisonment.
“Hold the line: Desperation does not validate a false confession, and psychological coercion voids any guilty plea under Section 36 of the Constitution. Demand legal access: Refuse to sign pre-drafted admissions or accept plea bargains without independent, uncoerced legal counsel.
“Force the state to show its case: An government designation isn’t proof of particular person guilt. Make the prosecution discharge its heavy constitutional burden underneath a sound written regulation.”
He raised five 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 develop into a everlasting presumption of legal guilt? How can a conviction delivered underneath a repealed statute fulfill Section 36(12) of the Constitution? Where is the written regulation changing peaceable advocacy or Biafran id right into a 20-yr terrorist offence? What particular, overt act of violence did Paul Okechukwu commit to justify stealing 20 years of his life?”
The lawyer noted that a judge’s gown does not elevate him above the Constitution, adding that labelling a movement “terrorist” doesn’t droop human rights.
According to him, the Constitution stays supreme and the regulation should prevail over political intimidation.
