Champion Newspapers Limited
For a better society

UK Court to hear the extraordinary rendition case of Nnamdi Kanu

646
Print Friendly, PDF & Email

.As he goes to Court October 4 in Umuahia

 

By Cosmas Chukwu

The family of a British citizen who was allegedly taken to Nigeria in an act of extraordinary rendition has been granted a court hearing to challenge the UK government for not intervening in his case.

Nnamdi Kanu, the leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (Ipob), a prominent separatist movement proscribed in Nigeria, was arrested in Kenya in June last year before being transported against his will to Nigeria, where he has been held ever since.

This year,in July, the UN working group on arbitrary detention published an opinion that the father of two had been subject to extraordinary rendition and said he should be released immediately.

However, successive UK foreign secretaries, first Dominic Raab and then Liz Truss, before she became prime minister, have refused to take a view as to whether Kanu was a victim of extraordinary rendition.

The family has been granted a judicial review to challenge that refusal, arguing that its effect has been that no action has been taken to help him.

His brother, Kingsley Kanu, said: “The British government is well known for its stance on human rights. I believe it must be decisive when it comes to its decision-making about very serious violations of the human rights of British citizens abroad, especially when the facts are clear, as they are in my brother’s case, and when the UN has investigated and reached a firm conclusion that my brother was subject to extraordinary rendition. I am very happy that the court has agreed that a hearing is necessary to decide this important issue.”

Kanu’s family claims he was tortured in Kenya and has been held in solitary confinement in Abuja since being transported there. The UN working group referred the case to the special rapporteur on torture. It expressed concern that he had been denied treatment and medication for his heart condition and highlighted that solitary confinement in excess of 15 consecutive days is prohibited under the Nelson Mandela rules, international non-binding standards.

In a court filing concerning a parallel case brought by Nnamdi Kanu in Abuja, the Nigerian government denied torturing or mistreating him,but rather  claimed that he entered Kenya unlawfully, having previously jumped bail in Nigeria, and so had no right to an extradition hearing.

In 2015, Kanu was arrested in Nigeria and charged with terrorism offences and incitement, after setting up a digital radio station, Radio Biafra, at his home in London. Two years later he fled the country while on bail after an attack on his family home, which he claimed killed 28 members of Ipob.

In January 2022, he pleaded not guilty to terrorism charges.

 

Shirin Marker, from Bindmans LLP, who is representing Kingsley Kanu, said it was essential for the new foreign secretary, James Cleverly, to reach a firm conclusion on whether her client’s brother had been the victim of extraordinary rendition in order to decide what steps to take to assist him.

 

“The evidence available to date establishes that he has been subject to extraordinary rendition and torture or inhumane treatment,” she said. “It is unacceptable for the UK government to continue to prevaricate on this issue. We are glad that the court has now granted permission for this case to move to a final hearing.”

Explaining her decision to grant a judicial review hearing, Mrs Justice Ellenbogen said: “Such decisions/inaction are, in principle, reviewable and do not enter forbidden areas, including decisions affecting foreign policy.”

The Foreign Office declined to comment while proceedings were active.

A similar case challenging Nnamdi Kanu’s extraordinary rendition and torture  is slated for hearing in Umuahia, Abia State, Nigeria on October 4,2022

 

Also, After some six months waiting, the Federal High Court in Umuahia, Abia state has fixed October 4, 2022, to hear Nnamdi Kanu’s extraordinary rendition suit which was filed before the court in March.

 

Aloy Ejimakor, the Special Counsel for Nnamdi Kanu and the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) announced the date for the hearing in a statement on Thursday.

 

The suit titled “Court to hear Mazi Nnamdi Kanu’s extraordinary rendition case on 4th October,” Ejimakor said the suit before the court is ‘sui generis’ (of a special class).

 

The lawyer added that “it is primarily aimed at redressing the infamous unlawful expulsion or extraordinary rendition of Nnamdi Kanu, which is a clear violation of his fundamental rights under Article 12(4) of the African Charter on Human and Peoples Rights, as well as Chapter IV of the Nigerian Constitution.”

 

In addition to the rendition, Kanu’s lawyer said he also sought relief from the Court to redress the myriad violations that came with the rendition, “such as the torture, the unlawful detention and the denial of the right to fair hearing which is required by law before anybody can be expelled from one country to the other. I am also seeking to halt his prosecution and restore him to the status quo before he was renditioned on 19th June 2021.”

 

The separatist leader has been detained by the secret police, Department of State Services (DSS) since his rendition to Nigeria from Kenya in June 2021 by President Muhammadu Buhari’s government.

 

He is currently standing trial for terrorism-related offences.

 

According to the statement, on January 19, 2022, “the High Court of Abia State decided that portion of violation of Kanu’s fundamental rights that occurred in 2017. Even as I had made claims that bordered on rendition, the Court declined jurisdiction on grounds that rendition, being related to extradition, lies within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Federal High Court. This is what informed my decision to initiate the suit before the Federal High Court”.

 

It continued, “To be sure, the extraordinary rendition of Nnamdi Kanu triggered myriad legal questions that cut across multiple jurisdictions in Nigeria and even triggered the international legal order, to boot. In other words, the rendition has expanded the matter of Kanu far beyond the realms of the Abuja trial and opened up new legal frontiers that must be ventilated to the hilt before other courts and tribunals within and without Nigeria.

 

“Thus, this very case before the Federal High Court, Umuahia is one of such that is aimed at seeking a definitive judicial pronouncement on the constitutionality of the extraordinary rendition. The ones in the United Kingdom, Kenya, African Union and the United Nations are in addition.”

 

Ejiofor, however, thanked his colleagues who had been putting in the work in the prosecution of the complex suit, namely Patrick Agazie, Ifeyinwa Nworgu, Tochukwu Arugbuonye, Franklin Amandi, Ohaeto Uwazie and Mandela Umegborogu.

 

Among the reliefs sought which the court will be considering are:

 

“A DECLARATION that the arrest of the Applicant in Kenya by the Respondents’ agents without due process of law is arbitrary, and the Respondents’ enforced disappearance of the Applicant for eight (8) days and their refusal to produce the Applicant before a Kenyan Court for the purpose of Applicant’s extradition is illegal, unlawful, unconstitutional and amount to infringement of the Applicant’s fundamental right against arbitrary arrest, to his personal liberty and to fair hearing as enshrined and guaranteed under the pertinent provisions of CFRN and the Charter.

 

“A DECLARATION that the detention of the Applicant in a non-official secret facility in Kenya and the torture of the Applicant in Kenya by the Respondents’ agents is illegal, unlawful, unconstitutional and amount to infringement of the Applicant’s fundamental right against unlawful detention, torture and to fair hearing, as enshrined and guaranteed under the pertinent provisions of CFRN and the Charter).

 

“A DECLARATION that, pursuant to Article 12(4) of the Charter, the expulsion (or extraordinary rendition) of the Applicant from Kenya to Nigeria by the Respondents without a decision taken in accordance with the law of Kenya is illegal, unlawful, unconstitutional and amounts to infringement of the Applicant’s fundamental right to fair hearing and not to be expelled from a State Party to the Charter except by virtue of a decision taken in accordance with the law, as enshrined and guaranteed under the pertinent provisions of CFRN and the Charter.

 

“A DECLARATION that any criminal prosecution of the Applicant the purpose of which the Respondents unlawfully expelled the Applicant from Kenya to Nigeria is illegal, unlawful, unconstitutional and amounts to infringement of the Applicant’s fundamental right to fair hearing, as enshrined and guaranteed under the pertinent provisions of CFRN and the Charter.

 

“AN ORDER OF INJUNCTION restraining and prohibiting the Respondents from taking any further step in any criminal prosecution of the Applicant enabled by the said unlawful expulsion of the Applicant from Kenya to Nigeria.

 

“AN ORDER mandating and compelling the the Respondents to forthwith restitute or otherwise restore the Applicant to his liberty, same being his state of being as of 19th June, 2021; and to thereupon repatriate the Applicant to his country of lawful domicile (to wit: the United Kingdom) to await the outcome of any formal request the Respondents may file before the competent authorities in Britain for the lawful extradition of the Applicant to Nigeria.

 

” AN ORDER mandating and compelling the Respondents to issue an official Letter of Apology to the Applicant for the infringement of his fundamental rights; and publication of said Letter of Apology in three (3) national dailies.

 

“AN ORDER mandating and compelling the Respondents to pay the sum of N25,000,000,000.00 (Twenty-Five Billion Naira) to the Applicant, being monetary damages claimed by the Applicant against the Respondents jointly and severally for the physical, mental, emotional, psychological, property and other damages suffered by the Applicant as a result of the infringements of Applicant’s fundamental rights by the Respondents.”

 

Ejimakor, however, expressed optimism that sooner than later, justice shall prevail for his client, Kanu.

Comments are closed.