Would Nnamdi Kanu be still standing trial after 5 years if he is not an Igbo? This question should form the background of what is proving to a bad criminal trial that is bound to have far-reaching consequences for political development of Ndi-Igbo in Nigeria.
Let us get some points out quickly. The rule of law means that anyone who commits crime gets to face trial and, if lawfully found guilty, serves sentence. That is if the law rules in that society. It will be a stretch to say that Nigeria presently is a rule of law state. No. Nigeria pretends to be one.
In a true rule of law state there is only one law for every one-the big and small, the privileged and the underprivileged. Does Nigeria look like such a society?
Think about that terrorist kingpin in one of the northern states who held a peace deal meeting with all his arms on display and boldly explained that he breached the first deal because the government betrayed him.
That guy is not in detention or facing any trial. Think about those who stoned Deborah to death. They identified themselves and boasted that they did it for Allah and will do it again. Sokoto and federal government rewarded them with freedom. So Nigeria is not a rule of law state.
So, the point in Nnamdi Kanu’s case is not whether it accords with the rule of law or not because Nigeria is not a rule of law state. It is about political justice. It is political wisdom.
We know the struggle for Biafra has been on for long. That struggle divides Nigerians, even Igbos. Many people feel it is a sheer waste of times. Others believe it is the only redemption for Ndi-Igbo in Nigeria. There is nothing criminal about asking for Biafra through a referendum. That is not by itself treason.
It is true that the struggle and agitation for Biafra has turned violent, leading to many deaths, some at the hands of the deranged agitators and others (most) at the hands of ‘terorist’ Nigerian security personnel who seemed on a deadly mission against Igbo youths.
I must say that the degeneration in the Biafran struggle and agitation is a terrible development in ala-Igbo. We lost far more than any gain. It is a disaster. But it should not be made worse by the mismanagement of Nnamdi Kanu’s trial.
Looking at the charges against Nnamdi Kan as a lawyer, it does not seem to me that there is a direct evidence linking him to any murder that occurred in the southeast. Incitement to violence and speech against the Nigerian state may not provide enough proof of criminal complicity in a particular murder, even if it proves a huge moral culpability.
Leaving law aside for now, the important point is that every legal trial is in some ways a political trial. The state decides to prosecute crimes. The state decides to end them even before completion of trials.
That is why the constitution grants the Attorney General the power to terminate trials despite their merits. This is in recognition that such termination may be in the bigger interest of the society. The decision to terminate a trial before conclusion of hearing is a political decision hence the court cannot review it.
The big question is whether there is enough public interest to exercise such power to end Nnamdi Kanu’s trial. The answer is yes. The entire landscape of the trial is politics, the politics of separatist agitation.
The rendition from Kenya and the many violations of human rights have sullied the sanctity of the trial. The refusal to obey some of the orders of court have deprived the trial of many bona fides such that many consider it a political persecution . That is the view of the hundreds who protested yesterday. Of course, there are many, even in the southeast, who believe that the trial should complete and Nnamdi Kanu should go to prison.
Ultimately, it will turn on political considerations. Which political calculus would feed into Bola Tinubu’s 2027 magic box? One fact against the Nnamdi Kanu’s team is that southeast does not have many votes to trade in this political transaction.
If we can boast of 4million votes against Bola Tinubu in 2027, the pendulum will swing towards immediate end of trial. But alas, by the contributory negligence of IPOB we have become a political minority. We do not register to vote and therefore we do not count much in political calculus. Shame.
So, what happens. I think southeast political leaders should weigh in and help secure presidential termination of the trial for the simple reason that conviction and imprisonment would destabilize the region.
The violence that will attend the realization that whereas terrorists from the north who have waged war against Nigeria received amnesty and peace deal and Nnamdi Kanu got criminal trial and imprisonment will be damaging to Nigeria, the southeast and criminal justice. It serves no useful purpose to continue the trial.
The big political lesson for Ndi Igbo is this: it is an error to continue to belittle politics in the struggle for justice for Igbos in Nigeria. Even if the answer is only Biafra, it is only feasible through democratic politics, not misguided agitation.
If you organize and win political power in southeast (which is easy with the number of youths supporting the cause), then you can get nigeria to have a referendum, you can even make an intelligent case in international arena. Or at least, you will have the votes to get Tinubu to selfishly release Nnamdi Kanu.
Now, while we wait for good sense to prevail, go out to register to vote. Do not make the mistake a second time.
