BREAKDOWN OF WHAT WENT WRONG WITH JUSTICE OMOTOSHO’S JUDGMENT

 EASILY DIGESTIBLE BREAKDOWN OF WHAT WENT WRONG WITH JUSTICE OMOTOSHO’S JUDGMENT

20.11.2025

Here is the plain-English version of why the judgment is illegal, biased, and useless in law.

Justice James Kolawole Omotosho

1. HE REFUSED TO FIRST DECIDE WHETHER HE EVEN HAD POWER TO TRY THE CASE

Before any court can try a criminal case, it must first answer one question:

Do we have the right (jurisdiction) to hear this case?

Kanu challenged the court’s right to try him.

Instead of ruling on it, the judge dodged the issue and pushed it aside.

A court cannot ignore jurisdiction.

If jurisdiction is in doubt, everything done afterwards is worthless.

Omotosho knew this, yet he refused to address it.

2. HE TOLD KANU TO PUT ALL OBJECTIONS IN A FINAL ADDRESS - THEN BLOCKED THE FINAL ADDRESS

This is outright trickery.

In the excerpt you provided, the judge told Kanu:

“Don’t raise jurisdiction now. Put it in your final written address.”

But later:

He blocked the filing of final addresses.

He went ahead to give judgment without hearing those objections.

It’s like telling a defendant:

“Speak later.”

And when “later” comes:

“Oh sorry, you can’t speak anymore.”

This is denial of fair hearing in its purest form.

3. HE REFUSED TO ISSUE WRITTEN RULINGS ON SERIOUS APPLICATIONS

Nigerian law is very clear:

Judges must give written reasons for their decisions.

Kanu filed several applications on important issues, such as:

Illegal rendition

Repealed laws

Abuse of court process

Double criminality

Invalid charges

The judge refused to write any ruling on them.

This alone makes the judgment illegal.

4. HE FORCED KANU TO TAKE A PLEA UNDER A REPEALED LAW

The charges brought against Kanu were based on a law that no longer exists (the old Terrorism Act of 2013).

The new 2022 Act replaced it.

The judge knew the old law was dead; refused to acknowledge the repeal

Forced Kanu to plead under the dead law anyway

This is like charging someone under a law that has been thrown in the dustbin.

Illegal. Void.

5. HE IGNORED THE CONSTITUTION’S REQUIREMENT THAT NO ONE CAN BE CONVICTED UNDER AN “UNWRITTEN” OR UNKNOWN OFFENCE

Nigeria’s Constitution says:

You cannot be punished for an offence that is not written down in a valid law.

But the judge:

Used allegations not in the charge

Used “facts” not presented in court

Used accusations that no witness ever mentioned

For example, he claimed Kanu planned to bomb the British and US embassies during EndSARS.

This is pure fiction.

Nobody in court ever said this.

It existed only in the judge’s mind.

A judge is not allowed to invent evidence.

6. HE PUT A “SAVINGS CLAUSE” ABOVE THE CONSTITUTION

He relied on a section of the new terrorism law that says “old cases continue”.

But here is the truth:

A savings clause cannot override the Constitution.

A repealed law remains repealed.

You cannot continue a case under a law that is no longer valid.

The judge put the Act above the Constitution.

No court is allowed to do that.

7. HE AVOIDED THE ISSUE OF “DOUBLE CRIMINALITY” EVEN THOUGH IT IS ESSENTIAL

Since the government claimed Kanu committed crimes in Kenya, the law requires the court to first check:

“Is this thing a crime in Kenya?”

“Did Kenya provide evidence?”

The answer is:

No evidence from Kenya

No Kenyan police report

No Kenyan witness

Nothing

The judge ran away from this issue completely.

This means the court had no power to try Kanu on those allegations.

8. HIS JUDGMENT IS AUTOMATICALLY USELESS BECAUSE HE DENIED FAIR HEARING

The law is very simple:

If a judge refuses to let you raise your objections

Or refuses to let you address the court

Everything he does afterward is null and void

It’s as if the trial never happened.

9. HE ADDED FALSE STORIES ABOUT BOMBING US/UK MISSIONS - STORIES THAT NEVER CAME FROM ANY EVIDENCE

This is shocking.

He inserted a narrative about bombing foreign embassies:

Not charged

Not alleged

Not testified to

Not part of any document

Not supported by any witness

Not part of the case at all

This is judicial misconduct of the highest order.

A judge is not allowed to make up stories to justify a conviction.

10. IN SUMMARY: THE JUDGMENT COLLAPSES COMPLETELY

Here is the bottom line in everyday language:

The judge didn’t follow the law

He didn’t follow the Constitution

He didn’t follow due process

He refused to rule on important issues

He used a dead law

He invented evidence

He blocked the defendant’s right to speak

He delivered a judgment that cannot stand

Therefore:

The judgment is worthless.

It is illegal.

It will not survive appeal.

It exposes the judge to disciplinary action. Copied