The family of detained leader of Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Nnamdi Kanu has asked the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) to defend the nation?s constitution by not allowing his continued trial under a repealed law.

In the letter signed by Prince Emmanuel Kanu on behalf of the Okwu- Kanu family said decried that NBA?s silence is helping an unlawful court case and Nnamdi Kanu and is breaking the constitution.

They therefore called on the association to publicly acknowledge that no person in Nigeria can be tried under a repealed law, to publicly affirm that double criminality under Section 76 of the 2022 Act is a mandatory condition for jurisdiction, to call out judicial misconduct where courts deliberately ignore constitutional limits, and to stop enabling public ignorance by remaining silent.

The letter reads in part: ?The hard truth is that the NBA has failed in its duty, and its silence in the face of clear constitutional violations has allowed an unlawful and fake court case against Mazi Nnamdi Kanu to continue.

The NBA, a body created to defend the rule of law and protect the legal order, has stood by quietly while Mazi Nnamdi Kanu is being tried under a law that no longer exists, a law that was repealed by the National Assembly, and whose use in any court violates Section 36(12) of the 1999 Constitution.

Throughout this period, the NBA has spoken no word, taken no action, and made no attempt to educate the public or correct the dangerous misunderstanding surrounding this trial. This is not neutrality; it is aiding injustice by doing nothing.

The controlling law for terrorism-related prosecutions in Nigeria today is the Terrorism Prevention and Prohibition Act 2022, NOT A REPEALED LAW, and that law makes it clear in Section 76(1)(d)(iii) that no Nigerian court can try a person for an offence allegedly committed in another country unless that foreign country also regards the alleged act as a crime. Kenya has never accused, investigated, or charged Mazi Nnamdi Kanu with any crime of any kind.

In simple language, this means there is no double criminality and therefore no jurisdiction, and without jurisdiction a trial is impossible. This is basic law that any second-year law student understands, yet the NBA has behaved as if the meaning is hidden or confusing.

Even worse, the ongoing trial is anchored entirely on the repealed Terrorism (Prevention Amendment) Act 2013, a law that ceased to exist when the 2022 Act came into effect.

The Constitution is very clear in Section 36(12) that no person may be tried for any criminal offence unless the law defining the offence is written and in force at the time of trial.

A repealed law is not in force and cannot be used to charge anyone. This is not our personal opinion; it is the binding position of the Supreme Court in cases such as Okenwa v. Military Governor of Imo State, Akinyede v. The Appraiser, Uwaifo v. Attorney-General of Bendel State, and Aoko v. Fagbemi.

These cases all affirm that a repealed criminal law is dead, wiped away, and cannot legally support a prosecution. Yet the NBA has acted as if these decisions do not exist, or as if the Constitution has suddenly become optional.

Some have tried to hide behind Section 98(3) of the 2022 Act, the so-called savings clause, but even that argument fails because the trial before Justice Omotosho is a completely fresh trial and cannot be ?saved? by a clause meant to preserve proceedings that were already ongoing.

Besides, no clause in any Act can override the Constitution, and Section 36(12) cannot be defeated by legislative wording.

The Constitution sits above every other law, and when any law conflicts with it, the Constitution prevails. Yet the NBA continues to act as if this simple hierarchy has become too complex to remember.

We must therefore ask a difficult question: why is the NBA refusing to say what is clearly true? Has the NBA become afraid of the government? Has it lost the courage to speak? Has it forgotten that its first duty is to defend the Constitution, not to stay silent for political comfort? Has it become an organisation that watches injustice in silence instead of challenging it?

The NBA cannot claim to be a guardian of justice while allowing courts to rely on dead laws and unconstitutional procedures without protest.

This silence has real consequences beyond Mazi Nnamdi Kanu. When the Bar refuses to challenge obvious illegality in a public case, it normalises abuses, empowers judges who ignore clear legal limits, leaves ordinary Nigerians helpless, and sends a message to the world that Nigerian lawyers no longer understand or defend their own laws.

Many Nigerians remain in prison today because their cases were handled carelessly by lawyers who did not challenge invalid charges or defective laws. The NBA must now decide whether it wants to be an institution that protects the rule of law or one that passively watches injustice spread.

If the NBA cannot defend the Constitution, then it has lost the moral authority to claim leadership of the Nigerian legal profession.

The rule of law in Nigeria is slowly dying, and the NBA?s silence is part of the reason. If the NBA refuses to act now, history will remember it as the body that watched the Constitution being violated and chose to do nothing.

This issue is bigger than Mazi Nnamdi Kanu. It concerns whether Nigeria remains a nation governed by valid laws or becomes a place where old, repealed and dead laws are dragged back from the grave to imprison citizens, and where courts bend to political pressure instead of obeying the Constitution.

The Okwu-Kanu family calls on the NBA to rediscover its conscience, rise to its duty, defend the Constitution, and stop pretending not to see what every informed Nigerian already knows.

Silence helps the wrongdoing, ignorance deepens the danger, and cowardice is itself a betrayal of justice. Only God knows how many innocent Nigerians are languishing in prisons convicted or detained under dead and repealed laws, as a result of the docility of the NBA and complicity of compromised judges. (THE SUN)

Update news