Re: #2.5 ||NaijaObserver|| #2: Arguing with is like talking to Deaf and Dumb: NNAMDI KALU CHARGE SHEET !!

[Abraham Madu]

MY ANALYSIS FOCUSES ON ONE KEY QUESTION THAT IS ON THE LIPS OF THE MASSES.

FIRST QUESTION IS

If the law on which Mazi Nnamdi Kanu is tried has been repealed, what other advantage could the prosecution hold onto in his trial especially as they have closed their case without amendment of same accusations?

1. The Legal Context

Mazi Nnamdi Kanu, leader of IPOB, has been charged mainly under Nigeria’s Terrorism (Prevention and Prohibition) Act, as well as sections of the Criminal Code (e.g. treasonable felony, incitement, and unlawful broadcast).

If the specific law or sections under which he was charged were repealed, it creates a serious legal vacuum for the prosecution. Normally, under Section 36( and (12) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended):

"No person shall be held guilty of a criminal offence that is not defined and the penalty therefore prescribed in a written law at the time the act was done.”

So, if the law has been repealed without a saving clause, the prosecution cannot lawfully rely on it.

2. However — What Advantage Can the Prosecution Still Hold?

Even if the main law is repealed, prosecutors might try to re-strategize in the following ways:

(a) Rely on “Continuing Offences”

They could argue that Kanu’s alleged offences — such as incitement, unlawful broadcasting, or terrorism financing — are continuing acts that persist beyond the repeal of the law.

Example: If he is alleged to have continued to make broadcasts or lead a proscribed group even after the repeal, they can charge him under new or existing provisions that remain in force.

(b) Re-file Under a Similar or Successor Law

If the repealed law has been replaced by a new one (for example, a newer version of the Terrorism Act), the prosecution may attempt to rearrange the charges under the new law’s equivalent provisions.

But what if the prosecution team have ended their case without amendment on the issue of the repealed law.”?

That means:

The prosecution relied on charges under a law that no longer exists or has been repealed,

And they closed their case (i.e., presented all evidence and witnesses) without correcting or amending those charges to fit a valid law.

2. Legal Implication of That Step

This situation is fatal to the prosecution’s case for one core reason:

Doctrine of Nullity

When a law creating an offence no longer exists, any proceeding based on it dies automatically.

In law, it is said to be “void ab initio” (invalid from the beginning).

So, even if the prosecution presents strong evidence, the court cannot convict under a law that no longer exists or is invalid.

The relevant constitutional safeguard is Section 36( and (12) of the Nigerian Constitution:

"No person shall be held guilty of a criminal offence that is not defined and the penalty therefore prescribed in a written law.”

That means no living law = no valid offence.

In the light of the above, the presiding judge has no option than to free Mazi Nnamdi Kanu unless he is biased or compromised.

Writer: Brave Son

07/11/2025

@highlight

Uchechigeme Anyanwụụtụtụ Okwu-Kanu

Family Writers Press International

#FreeMaziNnamdiKanu

Log in or sign up to view See posts, photos and more on Facebook.

On Saturday, November 8, 2025 at 11:36:49 AM CST, Nebukadineze Adiele <nebuka...@aol.com> wrote:

Dr Kassim,

you posed conscientious questions, which are actually indictments of Nigerians on the instances where your questions apply. Some people on these forums, exposed to the West where the rule of law apply at least 90% of the time, have no qualms justifying the injustice going on with Kanu's case -- mostly because of their biases stemming from parochial factors. When the Nigerian state barks, especially over Biafra/Igbo, Nigerians always supinely bow and sacrifice whatever is dearest to them in appeasement of the state.

In fairness to Nigerians though, most of the institutions and personalities you listed below have directly, indirectly, consistently, and sparingly expressed dissatisfaction, bordering on rejecting injustice, over the treatment of Kanu. Sowero led a protest against Kanu's continued incarceration and prosecution just last week; most Igbo personalities and Ọhaneze Ndi Igbo have been canvassing for Kanu's release for the last three years; some Yoruba personalities and institutions have periodically called for his release; an Arewa organization called for his release last month, etc. 

I must admit that Nnamdi Kanu speaks in so obnoxious a manner that people would easily be turned off enough by him and not give a hoot about his trial's unjustness. I get turned off too most of the times that I hear his utterances -- like yesterday. Kanu is absolutely impolitic, that is not a virtue or a positive quality of leadership. I have millions of blames to put on him, but this is not the right time to doing so, the time now is to release him -- his young children don't even know him and he is likely running out of funds. 

The question of releasing him on bail does not apply this time because the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court have both agreed that he did not jump bail; they agreed that Nigerian army's invading of his father's compound and killing multiple people, in an attempt to capture him when no court had revoked his bail, was justification enough for him to disappear -- his disappearance qualified as self defense. Even at that, Governor Soludo has asked for Kanu's release to him, so have Senator Abaribe and some other prominent Igbos asked. President Buhari promised to release him after some prominent Igbos visited him over Kanu, but he changed his mind after they left, because some sadistic clique convinced him otherwise. Nigeria has botched the criminal case against Kanu, he seems gradually dying of heart and mental ailments, therefore the only things that constitute justice now are dismissing the case and letting him go back to the UK to take care of his health and family.

Nebukadineze Adiele

On Saturday, November 8, 2025 at 12:35:32 AM EST, Ola Kassim <olaka...@aol.com> wrote:

Nebu:

If all of what you stated in your rejoinder are true (which I am inclined to believe they are in part if not wholly true, why are the following groups of Nigerian organizations not opining on the transgressions

against the Nigeria constitution you cited:

— the Press especially investigative journalists specializing on the law and the judicial system

—the Law Society (I can’t remember the name of the body that regulates the Law Profession in Nigeria

—Politicians at all levels of government including the those aligned to the current government and the opposition not speaking up

—Civil society organizations from all over Nigeria

Including labour unions, professional organizations

—Religious  organizations representing the major religions in Nigeria including Christians Muslims etc . led by their  leaders not only Christians but

—Traditional rulers—from the SE and  the rest of Nigeria.

—Academics—especially those from Faculties of Law,

Governance, Social studies etc. from all over Nigeria

—student bodies in post secondary schools in Niigeria

—etc. etc. etc. 

———speaking up on this issue?

Could it be this is because Nnamdi Kanu’s character and combative positions on issues surrounding his travails within the Nigerian legal system have made

him so toxic that none of the groups mentioned above, including those of SE and from the rest of Nigeria are no longer willing to risk their reputation by openly campaigning for his release.

I learnt this weekend that Emeka Ngwuonye is now back in the USA and living a normal after surviving the ordeals of numerous civil and criminal charges, arrests and incarceration for numerous offences for which he was sentenced in Nigeria.

I think someone of stature that Nnamdi Kanu’s  can listen to needs to advise him to

to tone down his rhetoric and hire experienced attorneys who might be able to get him out of the current log jam.

Even though Nnamdi Kanu appears  physically fit,

I think he is no longer mentally fit judging by his behaviour in court yesterday.

Senator Ekeremadu, former Head of the Senate in Nigeria who is currently in jail in a UK prison, was the main surety which enabled Nnamdi Kanu to regain his freedom the last time he was granted bail in Nigeria.

Are there any other Nigerians of SE or non SE origin who might be willing to provide a surety to secure the release of Nnamdi Kanu in the off-chance that he is granted bail?

Bye,

 

Ola

On Nov 7, 2025, at 20:58, 'Nebukadineze Adiele' via ||NaijaObserver|| <naijao...@googlegroups.com> wrote:



Olola,

The prosecution and the judge are not enforcing the laws of Nigeria, that in itself is injustice -- the judicial process is being manipulated into arriving at a predetermined outcome that has nothing to do with justice; they are brazenly doing this because only Nigerians cowardly tolerate injustice from their government.

They want to put Kanu away permanently using the judiciary, regrettably the judiciary is going along this plan without even hiding it. The judge has the power to dismiss criminal charges that do not abide by constitutional requirement, especially after the Supreme Court had alerted the prosecution to those charges' legal deficiency, but he has neither done so nor explained why the criminal charge must stand. Shockingly, he directs Kanu to put up a defense against charges that are afoul of the Constitution of Nigeria. 

I am concerned for Nnamdi Kanu's mental and physical health. You are a doctor, Olola, you can see that Kanu looks like a man gradually denying of an ailing internal organ -- by the way he looks now (he said he suffers from congestive heart failure but they are not giving him appropriate treatment). I suspect that his mental health is affected too -- he speaks maniacally, even though he is making sound points -- he chastised one of his legal advisers today for asking him to speak calmly. 

The only thing that keeps Kanu locked up and on trial has to be that the judge is being teleguided from outside of the judiciary; were his hands not bound, he would have dismissed these invalid charges long ago. The state wants to pronounce "guilty" against Kanu and put him away for life. The Supreme Court justices know that they willfully erred in saying that no law stops Nigeria from putting Kanu on trial, even though Nigeria extraordinarily renditioned him, therefor I don't expect them to reverse that ruling unless the threat over their heads when they made that decision has disappeared. It might take a violent revolution to fix Nigeria if things keep going this way.  

Nebukadineze Adiele

On Friday, November 7, 2025 at 04:46:14 PM EST, Ola Kassim <olaka...@aol.com> wrote:

Nebu:

Thanks for the answers to my questions.

I can now understand the intricacies of the legal controversies better than I did before reading your responses.

So where does this lead Nnamdi Kanu, the Justice system and the FGN on this matter?

If as scheduled for Nov 20, Judge Omotosho finds Nnamdi Kanu not guilty of the charges proffered against him by the FGN he should automatically regain his freedom unless the FGN immediately files an appeal to the Supreme court.

However if he is found guilty and sentenced to spend time in prison, what are the chances that Nnamdi Kanu can avoid continuing confinement  by appealing the case immediately and have the case returned to the Supreme Court?

Does the Supreme (apex) court) in Nigeria or anywhere else in the world (apart from the USA) revisit its previous decisions (similar to the US Supreme Court’s reversal on its prior decision on Roe v Wade)?

Bye,

Ola

On Nov 7, 2025, at 13:45, 'Nebukadineze Adiele' via ||NaijaObserver|| <naijao...@googlegroups.com> wrote:



Olola,

See my response beneath your posers. 

>>Why did Nnamdi Kanu’s lawyers  (before he fired them) not make the

submissions about Nigeria being incapable of prosecuting their client because of the manner in which he was captured in Kenya and returned to Nigeria (aka extraordinary rendition) in Judge Omotosho’s  Court?<<

They did; the lower disagreed with them but the Court of Appeal agreed with them, acquitted and discharged Kanu because of the extraordinary rendition. The FGN refused to comply with the ruling but bizzrely did not appeal it until after the window for appeal had elapsed. Shockingly, the incompetent and corrupt Nigeria Supreme Court accepted their stale appeal. It agreed with the Court of Appeal except that it saw no known Nigeria law that forbids Nigeria to put Kanu on trial despite his extraordinary rendition. The Supreme Court was wrong though. Once the Nigerian National Assembly ratified Nigeria's signatory to the extradition treaty, the Constitution mandated that Nigeria adhered strictly to every bit of that agreement as if it were a law enacted by the National Assembly (I have posted that section of the Constitution in the past but I don't have on my finger right away). Since the penalty for engaging in extraordinary rendition is that the erring country WOULD NOT GO ON WITH PROSECUTING THE EXTRAORDINARILY RENDITIONED, the Supreme Court was supposed to agree with the Court of Appeal because this is the law that forbids Nigeria to put Kanu on trial. He should have been let go without Nigeria losing its right to still properly extradite him later.

>>Why did Nnamdi Kanu not make this case himself

in an opening statement to Judge Omotosho when he started defending himself?<<

He has been making it; he even made it today, but ignoramuses keep saying he is using a delay tactics to evade defending himself. He puts up a defense, it implies that he has waived his right to objecting to his trial based on these legal deficiencies. Judge Omotosho (I don't know why they are referring to him as Justice when he doesn't sit at the Supreme Court) should have agreed with him if he is actually presiding over justice. The Supreme Court even reminded them about the illegality of charging him with a repealed law, yet the stupidly ignored the Supreme Court and this bozo of a judge keeps giving the prosecution's illegality a backing (something tells me that he might realize his error and dismiss the case in giving his judgment). Were this going on in the US, this judge would be sanctioned, even up to disbarment, for going along with this display of incompetency in the practice of law. 

 

>>Why has the UK government remained silent on the issue of extraordinary rendition to Nigeria of one of their citizens?<<

Kanu is a dual Nigerian and British citizen; his first citizen of Nigeria extraordinarily renditioned him from Kenya, not from the UK, so there is no infraction committed against the UK by Nigeria. The Kenyan government, were it responsible or held respect for itself, would have been the one to take Nigeria to task and demanded returning Kanu to Kenya, even at the risk of going to physical or diplomatic war if Nigeria failed to return him -- especially now that its courts have ruled so and the government has officially accepted so. What is happening to Kanu can happen to any of us with US/Canadian citizenship, that is why we cannot allow the government to use this illegality to establishing a precedent on a matter of this nature.  

>>Is it possible that the UK has remained silent because

Nnamdi is also a dual citizen of Nigeria— which as I understand means they can not interfere on issues

relating to a citizen in the country of second citizenship?<<

Yes; in addition to the fact that Nigeria did not kidnap him from the UK.

>>How was the USA able to prosecute the 9/11 AlQueeda, ISIS and other terrorists who were captured in Iraq, Syria and other locations and returned to the USA or Guantanamo Bay in Cuba?

Is their captures also not examples of extraordinary rendition?<<

They were captured on the battlefield as enemy combatants and they were well known members of terrorist organizations -- extradition treaty of this sort does not apply to prisoners of war. Despite Nigeria's designation of IPOB, it does not qualify as a terrorist organization and it is not waging a war against Nigeria, in the likes that ISIS, Al Qaeda, etc. were waging against the West; Kanu was not captured on a battlefield against Nigerian soldiers. The terrorists captured outside of battlefield in functioning countries (like Pakistan, Jordan, or then Yemen) were properly renditioned to the US (courts did not allow those ones to be sent to Guantanamo Bay). 

Extraordinary rendition is a lawlessness similar to terrorism, that is why the treaty on extradition is categorical in forbidding trial of an extraordinarily renditioned person. What Buhari did, in ordering the kidnapping of Kanu from Kenya, qualifies as international terrorism (he did similarly when he was military head of state in 1985; it was against Umaru Dikko, but it was aborted by British security apparatuses); had he done Kanu's in any country in the West or in any self-respecting Third World country, he would have been designated a terrorist subject to apprehension and trial outside of Nigeria. The ongoing so-called trial of Nnamdi Kanu in Abuja is a travesty, the Nigerian judiciary has fallen to a despicable ebb worse than those in Somalia, Eritrea, North Korea, Turkmenistan, Afghanistan, etc. Folks should not close their eyes to it because of their hatred for Kanu. 

Thanks.

Nebukadineze Adiele

On Friday, November 7, 2025 at 11:26:32 AM EST, Ola Kassim <olaka...@aol.com> wrote:

Nebu:

I have read you submission below twice.

I have the following questions for you:

Why did Nnamdi Kanu’s lawyers  (before he fired them) not make the

submissions about Nigeria being incapable of prosecuting their client because of the manner in which he was captured in Kenya and returned to Nigeria (aka extraordinary rendition) in Judge Omotosho’s  Court?

Why did Nnamdi Kanu not make this case himself

in an opening statement to Judge Omotosho when he started defending himself?

Why has the UK government remained silent on the issue of extraordinary rendition to Nigeria of one of their citizens?

Is it possible that the UK has remained silent because

Nnamdi is also a dual citizen of Nigeria— which as I understand means they can not interfere on issues

relating to a citizen in thecountry of second citizenship?

How was the USA able to prosecute the 9/11 AlQueeda, ISIS and other terrorists who were captured in Iraq, Syria and other locations and returned to the USA or Guantanamo Bay in Cuba?

Is their captures also not examples of extraordinary rendition?

Bye,

Ola

On Nov 7, 2025, at 10:56, Afis Deinde <odide...@yahoo.com> wrote:



THE COURT HAS FORECLOSED KANU'S DEFENSE AND SET NOVEMBER 20 FOR JUDGMENT 

When Kanu failed to open his defense today, Honourable Justice Omotosho foreclosed his defense and set a date for judgment. On November 20, 2025, the judge will pronounce its final judgment on the case. The following are the likely options of the judgment:

(1) The court will first rule on his latest challenge to jurisdiction. If the court determines that it lacks jurisdiction on any of the charges, the court will discharge Kanu on such charges. If it determines that it lacks jurisdiction in all the charges, it will discharge Kanu in all and set him free. If it determines that it has jurisdiction,  it will proceed to either

(2(a)) Find him not guilty,  discharge and acquit him. He goes home a free man, or

(b) Find him guilty and sentence him. He will then be sent to Kuje Prison.

One thing is definitely clear: After November 20, Kanu will leave DSS facility. 

The case of Nnamdi Kanu is about to enter the next stage.

@@@

Afis

Who’s promising you all things, heaven on earth?

Lemme guess, a naked man with his hands in his pockets!

Sent from my iPhone

On Nov 7, 2025, at 9:42 AM, 'Nebukadineze Adiele' via ||NaijaObserver|| <naijao...@googlegroups.com> wrote:



Afis Afọnshi Odidere aka Omotuwanshe, aka Deinde, aka Niyi, aka Idera, aka, aka, and aka:

You are a living example of why semi-literacy is more dangerous and more upheaving of society than stark illiteracy. Nnamdi Kanu has been telling Nigeria that the charges against him are invalid, and that Nigeria cannot put him on trial even if the charges were valid because Nigeria got access to him through extraordinary rendition -- Nigeria is a signatory to the law governing extradition; that law forbids parties to it to engaging in extraordinary rendition, the penalty for any party that engaged in extraordinary rendition is that it WOULD NOT POSECUTE the extraordinarily renditioned; it must let him/her go and seek lawful renditioning. Courts in Nigeria and in Kenya have ruled that Nnamdi Kanu was extraordinarily renditioned, therefore, he should have been let go, while Nigeria pursued legal extradition, were Nigeria a lawful state or if its intention with Kanu is justice. 

The least expected of properly educated and honest people is to butt out of this matter, if they are so unjust human beings that they cannot criticize injustice and the abuse of the Nigerian judiciary. But due to semi-literacy and sadism, Afis Odidere has been echoing Kanu's position while thinking that he has been criticizing Kanu. Two days ago, I corrected his self-mockery for not knowing that he was agreeing with Kanu's claims of unjust prosecution when he claimed that Kanu was guaranteed imprisonment outside of due process of the law. Instead of his ignorance chilling him, Afis tops his earlier miring in semi-literacy and discombobulation over Kanu's unjust prosecution with his lates self-mockery.  

Afis Afọnshi Odidere proves Nnamdi Kanu right by posting the invalid charges that the dumb prosecutors in Nigeria preferred against Kanu. I am not going to waste my time on this, I will just illustrate with one or two of the charges and shame the filthily fat pig who, in attempting to ridicule Kanu, actually showcased his ignominious certification in semi-literacy. 

Count one is not only stupid, it also clearly shows that the prosecutors are unworthy of being paralegals, not to talk of being SAN. It alleges that on XYZ date, Nnamdi Kanu made a broadcast while residing in London, therefore he had unlawfully assembled at Enugu with some unknown people on that same day and time (that is what section 41(c) of the Criminal Code Act is all about). Nothing in the state's case in chief placed Nnamdi Kanu at Enugu at that specific date and time, or showed that anyone unlawfully assembled in Enugu as a result of Kanu's broadcast. In addition, their not placing Kanu in Enugu at that time and date shows that Kanu was in London at that time and date, therefore Nigeria cannot prosecute him for a non-existent crime or for having incited a non-existent crime without properly procuring him from London through a lawful extradition. 

Count two is of section 375 of the Criminal Code Act, which criminalizes defamation and publishing of defamatory material. It alleges that Kanu called Buhari a pedophile, a terrorist, and an idiot. This is a valid law in Nigeria but Kanu cannot be prosecuted on it now, because he was extraordinarily renditioned to Nigeria -- prosecuting him violates the law that empowers Nigeria to enter into international treaties; it also violates the international law against extraordinary rendition. 

The rest of the charges are based on Terrorism Prevention Amendment Act, 2013, which was repealed and replaced by the Terrorism Prevention and Prohibition Act, 2022. All charges based on this repealed law are null, void, and invalid; prosecuting Kanu based on this invalid law is a violation of section 36(8) and (12) of the 1999 Constitution of Nigeria; it violates Kanu's right to fair hearing; it is a misusing of the judiciary for injustice instead of justice; it evinces legal incompetence of the prosecution team and of the judge who allows the trial to go on; it should lead to disciplinary action against the sitting judge had Nigeria a non-corrupt judicial system. Normally, the defense would jubilate in instances where the prosecution and judge are this incompetent and in violation of the Constitution -- if it led to a conviction, overturning the conviction at appeal would be swift. Unfortunately, Nigerian judiciary stinks; it only wants Kanu to put up a defense over invalid charges in order that their pre-planned imprisonment of him would appear legitimate in the eyes of gullible Nigerians.

Again, I have written for posterity, not for you, Afis Afọnshi Odidere; you lack the intelligence and attention span to reading and comprehending what I have written here. For those of you who read and comprehended what I have written, examine your consciences before you haul the next stone at Kanu. Yes, Nnamdi Kanu is not your  choirboy, but if you keep supporting injustice against him, because president Tinubu is your tribesman or because you hate Nnamdi Kanu, someday what has befallen Kanu might befall you or your loved ones. You indirectly defend your right when you defend the right of your worst enemy. Indeed, Kanu has been correct all along -- his trial is invalid by every legal ramification; the charges speak volumes -- as to the corrupt and incompetent judicial and political systems in Nigeria.

Nebukadineze Adiele

On Thursday, November 6, 2025 at 06:13:51 PM EST, Afis Deinde <odide...@yahoo.com> wrote:

NNAMDI KALU CHARGE SHEET !!

For those of you saying that NNamdi KALU is being chãrged under a non existent law 

Pls this is NNAMDI KALU'S charge sheet 

Full List of Amended Charges Against Nnamdi Kanu Filed By FG 

Count one:

That you Nnamdi Kanu, male adult of Afaraukwu lbeku Umahia North Local Government Area of Abia State being the leader of the Indigenous People of Bialra (IPOB) on diverse dates in 2014 and 2015 in London, United Kingdom, did broadcast on Radio Biafra monitored in Enugu and other areas within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court, preparations made by you and others now at large for states in the South-East and South-South zones and other communities in Kogi and Benue States to secede from the Federal Republic of Nigeria with a view to constituting same into the Republic of Biafra and you thereby committed an offence punishable under Section 41(c) of the Criminal Code Act, CAP. C77, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 2004.

Count two:

That you Nnamdi Kanu, male, adult, of Afaraukwu Ibeku, Umuahia North Local Government Area ot Abia State, on or about the 28th April, 2015 in London, United Kingdom did broadcast on Radio Biafra monitored in Enugu, Enugu State and other parts of Nigeria within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court, referred to Major General Muhammadu Buhari, GCON, the President and Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of the Federal Republic of Nigeria as a paedophile, a terrorist, an idiot and an embodiment of evil, knowing same to be false and you thereby committed an offence contrary to Section 375 of the Criminal Code Act, Cap C. 77, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria 2004.

Count Three:



That you Nnamdi Kanu, male adult of Afaraukwu lbeku Umahia North Local Government Area of Abia State between the month of March and April 2015 imported into Nigeria and kept in Ubulusiuzor in Ihiala Local Government Area of Anambra state within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court , a Radio transmitter known as TRAM 50L concealed in a container of used household which you declared as used household items and you thereby committed an offence contrary to Section 47 (2) of the Criminal Code of Act ,Cap C45, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 2004.

Count four



That you Nnamdi Kanu, male, adult. of Afaraukwu iIbeku, Umuahia North Local Government Area of Abia State in London, United Kingdom between 2018 and 2021 Radio Biafra monitored in Enugu, Enugu State and FCT, Abuja within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court, professed to be a member of Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), a proscribed organisation in Nigeria and you thereby committed an offence punishable under Section 16 Terrorism Prevention Amendment Act, 2013.

Count five:

That you Nnamdi Kanu, male, adult, of Afaraukwu Ibeku, Umuahia North Local Government Area of Abia State on the 22th of April, 2021 in London, United Kingdom on Radio Biafra monitored in Enugu, Enugu State and other parts of Nigeria within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court did an act of terrorism in that you incite the other members (followers) of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB}, a proscribed organisation in Nigeria, to look for security personnel, their family members through a Radio Biafra on 102.1FM monitored through the IPOB Community Radio and you thereby committed an offence contrary to and punishable under Section 1 (2) (h) of the Terrorism Prevention Amendment Act.

Count six:

That you Nnamdi Kanu, male, adult, of Afaraukwu Ibeku, Umuahia North Local Government Area of Abia Stale on the 16thh of May, 2021, in London, United Kingdom within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court did commit an act in furtherance of an act of terrorism by making a broadcast that “In 2 weeks’ time, what will happen will shake the world, people will die, the whole world will stand still, mark my word” and you thereby committed an offence contrary to and punishable under Section 1 (2) (b) of the Terrorism Prevention Amendment Act, 2013.

Count seven:

That you Nnamdi Kanu, male, adult, of Afaraukwu Ibeku, Umuahia North Local Government Area of Abia State on the 31st of May, 2021, in London, United Kingdom within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court did an act in furtherance of an act of terrorism by issuing a deadly threat that anyone who flouted your sit-at-home order should “write his/her will,” as a result banks, schools, markets, shopping malls, fuel stations were not opened for businesses and vehicular movements grounded and you thereby committed an offence contrary to and punishable under Section 1 (2) (b) of the Terrorism Prevention Amendment Act, 2013.

- Nuella Igwe

@@@

Afis

Who’s promising you all things, heaven on earth?

Lemme guess, a naked man with his hands in his pockets!

Sent from my iPhone

--
To join this group, send email to naijao...@googlegroups.com
 
View this message at https://groups.google.com/a/googlegroups.com/d/msg/naijaobserver/topic-id/message-id
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "||NaijaObserver||" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to naijaobserve...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/naijaobserver/81082546.3042449.1762504763071%40mail.yahoo.com.

--
To join this group, send email to naijao...@googlegroups.com
 
View this message at https://groups.google.com/a/googlegroups.com/d/msg/naijaobserver/topic-id/message-id
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "||NaijaObserver||" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to naijaobserve...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit

https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/naijaobserver/1C3CD315-EAD7-46DF-A7C6-9A31EF316DCA%40yahoo.com

.

--
To join this group, send email to naijao...@googlegroups.com
 
View this message at https://groups.google.com/a/googlegroups.com/d/msg/naijaobserver/topic-id/message-id
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "||NaijaObserver||" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to naijaobserve...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit

https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/naijaobserver/869291145.3144837.1762541143208%40mail.yahoo.com

.

--
To join this group, send email to naijao...@googlegroups.com
 
View this message at https://groups.google.com/a/googlegroups.com/d/msg/naijaobserver/topic-id/message-id
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "||NaijaObserver||" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to naijaobserve...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit

https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/naijaobserver/1800730747.3216613.1762567000369%40mail.yahoo.com

.