The South East Revival Group (SERG) has issued a strong warning over what it describes as “deeply troubling judicial conduct” in the ongoing trial of detained IPOB leader, Mazi Nnamdi Kanu, accusing the presiding judge, Justice James Omotosho of the Federal High Court, Abuja, of conducting proceedings in a manner that threatens public confidence in the judiciary.
In a statement released on Sunday and signed by its National Director of Publicity, Rt. Hon. Evang. Nnaemeka Aleke, the group said concerns raised earlier by the Human Rights Writers Association of Nigeria (HURIWA) have exposed a disturbing pattern of “hurried, restrictive, and choreographed” judicial actions that could undermine the very foundation of the rule of law.
“A Dangerous Pattern” — SERG
SERG said allegations of bias, denial of fair hearing and an unusual haste in delivering judgment point to a judicial process that appears compromised.
“How can a defendant incarcerated for over four years be denied adequate time and opportunity to defend himself?” the group queried. “When a court seems eager to deliver judgment without considering fundamental legal objections, Nigerians are justified to fear that justice is being sacrificed on the altar of political expediency.”
According to SERG, the allegations, if true, risk sending a dangerous message that Nigerian courts can be used to formalize outcomes influenced outside the courtroom.
Charges Based on Repealed Law?
The organisation highlighted HURIWA’s warnings that the terrorism charges brought against Kanu may be legally void, if indeed they are based on a repealed piece of legislation.
“The foundation of any criminal trial must be a valid law,” SERG insisted. “A court cannot build a judicial edifice on a legal vacuum. If the charges are rooted in a repealed statute, the proceedings collapse automatically.”
Failing to address this fundamental legal issue, SERG said, fuels suspicion that a predetermined verdict is being pursued regardless of the law.
Self-Determination Is Not a Crime
SERG reiterated that self-determination is protected under international law and the Nigerian Constitution. It accused the government of conflating peaceful political advocacy with terrorism.
“No democratic state criminalises peaceful agitation,” the group said, noting that global legal precedents affirm that political speech remains protected unless it explicitly incites imminent violence, a threshold Nnamdi Kanu’s expressions, they argue, do not meet.
The group warned that criminalising self-determination sets a dangerous precedent that can be used against any individual or region demanding constitutional reforms.
Judicial Conduct Fueling Regional Tensions
SERG stressed that the current handling of the Kanu case has deepened feelings of marginalisation in the South East, further eroding trust in national institutions.
READ ALSO: Court Fixes November 20 for Judgment in Nnamdi Kanu’s Terrorism Trial
“A nation already struggling with mistrust cannot afford the impression that its courts are not independent,” SERG noted. “The judiciary must not appear captured, especially in a case with massive national and international attention.”
Calls for Intervention by Court of Appeal, NJC
The group backed Kanu’s legal team’s decision to approach the Court of Appeal, urging the appellate court to act decisively, as it did in its earlier landmark ruling in Kanu’s favour.
SERG also called on the National Judicial Council (NJC) to investigate the conduct of Justice Omotosho to determine whether his actions align with judicial ethics and independence.
“History Will Remember This Moment”
SERG concluded that the case has become a defining test of Nigeria’s commitment to justice and constitutional democracy.
“The question is no longer about one man,” the statement read. “It is about whether the Nigerian judiciary will uphold justice or bow to political convenience.”
The group reaffirmed its commitment to advocating justice, fairness, and equity, noting that no nation can claim to be democratic if its courts are seen as instruments of predetermined outcomes.