During our visitation today, ONYENDU Mazi Nnamdi Kanu instructed us to convey to the civilised world his resolve to take his trial in so far as it comports with the tenets of the law. He made it clear that the era of institutional bias against him by Abuja courts is over in his case.
He stands to challenge any court that fails to align its decisions with RULE OF LAW. He maintains that, with the obvious exception of one, the rest of the decisions taken in his cases in Abuja have been riddled with blatant unconstitutionality in contravention of Section 36 of the Nigerian Constitution that mandated courts be “independent” and “impartial”.
It’s particularly noteworthy that the finding made by the Supreme Court to the effect that Justice Binta Murtala-Nyako is biased by revoking Mazi Kanu’s is sufficient reason to oust her jurisdiction, especially as she also dishonored the Supreme Court by her inexplicable refusal to reinstate the bail.
In the circumstance therefore, especially consequent upon her recusal, Justice Binta Murtala-Nyako should no longer have any business with Mazi Kanu’s case. Thus, it is an egregious breach of the law for the Chief Judge of Federal High Court (Justice John Tsoho) to reassign Mazi Kanu’s case to a judge whose jurisdiction is forever barred by an extant order of recusal.
For the foregoing reasons, the entire proceedings conducted on 10th February 2025 before Justice Binta Nyako’s court has no foundation in law and reason and the same goes for any ruling that was purportedly made that day.
Therefore, those peddling the narrative that Mazi Kanu’s case has been adjourned indefinitely do not understand the basic law and that’s is: Once a judge is recused, she has lost the jurisdiction to convene, sit or deliver any ruling on the same case from which she has been recused. That’s what the black letter law says and it shall abide, now and forever.
Signed:
Aloy Ejimakor, Esq.
f/Mazi Nnamdi Kanu legal team.
