Nnamdi Kanu’s Endless Trial: The Justice System in Crisis

By Femi Ogundele

The ongoing trial of Nnamdi Kanu, leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), has become a symbol of Nigeria’s broken justice system and its inability to handle political dissent fairly. With Kanu now facing trial under a fourth judge, the case has dragged on for years, marked by legal delays, government interference, and human rights concerns. The Nigerian government’s handling of this case raises serious questions about due process, political persecution, and the country’s commitment to justice.

From the outset,  the trial of Nnamdi Kanu has been highly controversial. Arrested in 2015 on charges of treasonable felony, he was granted bail in 2017 but fled Nigeria after a military raid on his home. His re-arrest in 2021, following an extraordinary rendition from Kenya, was a blatant violation of international law. The Nigerian government has insisted on keeping him in detention despite multiple court rulings ordering his release. If the government cannot respect its own judiciary’s decisions, how can citizens trust the system?

One of the biggest problems with Kanu’s trial is the constant changes in judges, which suggest political interference. A fourth judge taking over the case means that every ruling and argument made under previous judges must now be re-examined. This is nothing more than a delay tactic. The government seems intent on keeping Kanu locked up indefinitely rather than giving him a fair and speedy trial. This pattern of legal manipulation is dangerous for Nigeria’s democracy.

The way the government has handled this trial also exposes a selective approach to justice. Bandits and terrorists in the North have been granted amnesty and reintegrated into society, yet Kanu, whose movement is political in nature, remains in detention. While IPOB has been accused of violent activities, its leader has repeatedly called for a referendum, a democratic process. If Nigeria truly values democracy, why is it afraid of allowing the people to decide their fate?

The continued detention of Kanu without proper trial is also fueling resentment in the Southeast. Many Igbos see his persecution as part of a larger historical pattern of marginalization. The government’s hardline approach to IPOB, compared to its softer treatment of other separatist and insurgent groups, reinforces feelings of injustice. If the authorities think suppressing Kanu will silence the Biafra agitation, they are mistaken because it is only making the movement stronger.

Beyond Kanu’s individual case, this trial has exposed deeper flaws in Nigeria’s judicial system. When the executive branch ignores court rulings and manipulates legal proceedings, it sets a dangerous precedent. If this can happen to a high-profile figure like Kanu, what hope is there for ordinary Nigerians seeking justice? The rule of law must apply to everyone, not just those in power.

Another worrying aspect is the government’s use of prolonged detention as a political weapon. Kanu is being treated as a political prisoner, held in isolation, and denied basic rights. His lawyers and family members have raised concerns about his deteriorating health. If the Nigerian government believes in its case against Kanu, why not allow him to defend himself in a transparent and fair trial?

This trial is not just about Nnamdi Kanu, it is about Nigeria’s commitment to human rights and democracy. A country that claims to be democratic cannot behave like an authoritarian state when dealing with political opponents. The Buhari administration was known for its heavy-handed tactics, and many hoped that President Tinubu’s government would take a different approach. Unfortunately, this case shows that little has changed.

If the government is serious about ending separatist agitations, it must address the root causes rather than using force. Dialogue and political engagement are the only lasting solutions. Detaining Kanu indefinitely without a fair trial will not make the Biafran question disappear. Instead, it risks radicalizing more people and increasing instability in the Southeast.

It is time for the Nigerian government to prove that justice is not just a tool for punishing opponents. Kanu deserves a fair trial or immediate release if there is no solid case against him. The continued delays and legal gymnastics only weaken the credibility of the justice system and the country’s democratic reputation. If Nigeria wants to move forward as a true democracy, it must respect its own laws and the rights of its citizens.

The world is watching, and history will remember how Nigeria handles this case. Will the government choose justice, fairness, and dialogue, or will it continue down the path of oppression and lawlessness? The answer will shape not just Kanu’s fate, but also Nigeria’s future as a nation that claims to uphold the rule of law.