Lateef Fagbemi, the Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, has stated that the offence committed by Nnamdi Kanu, the arrested leader of the outlawed Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), is complicated and can only be determined by a competent court of law.
He added that since the matter was already in court, it should be left to the law to have its way.
The AGF said this while responding to questions at the Sectoral Ministerial Briefing on the first anniversary of the President Bola Tinubu’s administration on Friday.
He also pointed out that there was a remarkable difference between Kanu’s case and that of Omoyele Sowore.
While pointing out that Kanu is being held in accordance with the Constitution, he added that the matter was still in court.
The Attorney General further added that the Federal Government secured 250 convictions for terrorism and other criminal offences in one year.
On Tuesday, Kanu’s lawyers filed a Preliminary Objection at the Federal High Court Abuja, asking the trial judge, Justice Binta Nyako, to decline jurisdiction to proceed with the trial against him.
Part of the issue for determination, is whether the court has the jurisdiction to try Kanu for any, or all the offences charged against him in Counts 1, 2, 4,5 and 8, to quash the said counts on the ground that the law which the said counts were predicated, is unconstitutional.
They pointed out that there are two international tribunal decisions against the arrest, detention, prosecution and trial of Kanu, which under the Nigerian constitution, is binding on the court.
They also stated that the law under which Kanu is currently being tried in these counts, has been repealed, and is also not supported by proof of evidence, adding that it is an abuse of court process.
Counsel to Kanu is also asking the court to decline jurisdiction to entertain Count 15, because it is not in compliance with the Administration of Criminal Justice Act, not within the territorial jurisdiction of the court, and is not supported by any proof of evidence and law.
They want the court to take further notice that count 3 of the charges is unconstitutional, as it seeks to punish Kanu for an act that was not a crime when it occurred, and is an abuse of the court process.
Justice Nyako had on Monday, dismissed the request by Kanu for the restoration of his revoked bail and the removal from the custody of the Department of State Services (DSS), to a house arrest or prison custody.