By Chioma Amaryllis Ahaghotu
Kanu has long claimed that the Nigerian courts lack the authority to try him because “the law under which he is charged does not exist.”
But that claim crumbles under the weight of both the Constitution and the timeline of Nigeria’s anti-terrorism legislation.
When Kanu was first arrested in 2015, the applicable law was the Terrorism (Prevention) Act, 2011, as amended by the Terrorism (Prevention) (Amendment) Act, 2013.
That Act was duly passed by the National Assembly and signed into law by President Goodluck Jonathan. It empowered the Federal High Court to try terrorism-related offenses and clearly defined what constituted acts of terrorism.
Under Section 30 of the 2013 Amendment, the Act provided that:
“The Federal High Court located in any part of Nigeria, regardless of where the offence is committed, shall have jurisdiction to try offences under this Act.”
And Section 1(2) of the same law defined terrorism as:
“Any act deliberately done with malice aforethought which may seriously harm or damage a country or an international organization and is intended to intimidate a population, compel a government to act or abstain from acting, or destabilize a fundamental political, constitutional, economic or social structure of a country.”
Those provisions were already in force two years before Kanu’s 2015 arrest, meaning the Federal High Court had full jurisdiction to try him then. His initial trial, therefore, rested on an existing and valid legal foundation.
When he was re-arrested in 2021, Nigeria’s terrorism law had evolved, not disappeared.
In May 2022, the Terrorism (Prevention and Prohibition) Act, 2022 replaced the previous versions, consolidating and strengthening their provisions. Under Section 32(1) of the 2022 Act:
“The Federal High Court shall have exclusive jurisdiction for the trial of all offences under this Act.”
This Act did not create a new offense but rather reinforced existing laws governing terrorism, secessionist violence, and acts threatening national security.
Therefore, there’s no “gap” in the law that invalidates Kanu’s trial.
The same conduct, incitement, organization of armed groups (ESN), and calls for violent secession, remains illegal under every iteration of Nigeria’s terrorism laws from 2011 to 2022.
Moreover, the 1999 Constitution (as amended) independently grants the Federal High Court authority to try offenses against the state. Section 251(1)(a) provides that:
“Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in this Constitution, the Federal High Court shall have and exercise jurisdiction… in matters connected with or pertaining to the administration or the management and control of the Federal Government or any of its agencies.”
This includes crimes like treason, treasonable felony, and terrorism.
So whether in 2015 or 2021, the legal framework was solid.
The 2011 and 2013 Acts governed his first arrest, while the 2022 Act and the Constitution back his current trial.
Kanu’s claim that “no law exists” isn’t a matter of legal fact, it’s a rhetorical distraction.
The law has always existed.
The Federal High court has always had jurisdiction.
And justice cannot be nullified by semantics and emotional appeal.
