A High Court sitting in Nairobi, Kenya, has ruled that the abduction and forceful transfer of Nnamdi Kanu, leader of the proscribed Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), from Kenyan soil to Nigeria in June 2021 was illegal and unconstitutional.
Justice E.C. Mwita of the Milimani Law Courts delivered the judgement on Tuesday in the fundamental rights enforcement suit marked HCCHRPET/E359/2021. The case was filed by Kingsley Kanu, the brother of the IPOB leader, challenging the actions of the Kenyan authorities over the controversial extradition.
In a certified copy of the judgement obtained by The News Guru (TNG), the court found the Government of Kenya guilty of violating both domestic and international human rights obligations. Justice Mwita ruled that Kanu was lawfully in Kenya and therefore entitled to the full protection of the country’s Constitution.
“Having entered Kenya lawfully, Mr. Kanu was subject to the protection offered by the Constitution of Kenya 2010,” the court ruled. “The Government of Kenya had an obligation to uphold and protect his rights and fundamental freedoms.”
According to the ruling, Kanu was abducted in Nairobi, held in solitary confinement, tortured, denied basic medical care, and was eventually handed over to Nigerian authorities without any legal extradition process. The court described the ordeal as a “gross violation of his rights,” citing inhumane and degrading treatment, arbitrary detention, and illegal transfer.
Consequently, the court awarded Kshs 10 million (approximately ₦119.6 million) in general damages against the Government of Kenya, to be paid through the Office of the Attorney General.
Justice Mwita issued several declarations, including:
That the abduction, incommunicado confinement, torture, and denial of food and medication amounted to a breach of Kanu’s fundamental rights.
That his subsequent forcible removal to Nigeria violated Kenyan law, as well as constitutional guarantees of personal security and freedom of movement.
That the actions of the Kenyan government were unconstitutional and illegal.
READ ALSO: Kanu terrorism trial: Witnesses to testify behind camera for security
In response to the ruling, IPOB hailed the judgement as a “landmark victory” and a “resounding judicial earthquake,” according to a statement signed by its spokesperson, Emma Powerful.
IPOB described the ruling as validation of its position that the 2021 incident was not a lawful extradition but an “extraordinary rendition” — a term used in international law to denote the unlawful transfer of a person across borders without legal process.
“This judgement vindicates our consistent position that what transpired in Nairobi in June 2021 was a criminal act of state-sponsored international terrorism involving the highest authorities of the Nigerian and Kenyan governments,” the statement read.
The group praised Professor PLO Lumumba, lead counsel in the Kenyan case, for his “courage, clarity, and tenacity” in securing the legal victory, and commended Justice Mwita for resisting “political interference and international diplomatic pressure.”
IPOB insisted that Kanu’s abduction was a coordinated act between Kenyan and Nigerian security operatives at Jomo Kenyatta International Airport. They allege he was illegally detained, chained, tortured, and flown to Abuja without a hearing or extradition warrant.
The group called the verdict a permanent stain on the legacy of former Kenyan President Uhuru Kenyatta, former Nigerian President Muhammadu Buhari, and former Attorney General Abubakar Malami, accusing them of committing crimes against humanity.
IPOB vowed to pursue global accountability, warning that no government official involved in the case — in Kenya, Nigeria, or elsewhere — will escape justice.
“This is the beginning of a global accountability campaign. All those responsible shall be pursued to the ends of the earth… This is your victory — a warning to tyrants that international borders will no longer shield criminal regimes from justice,” the statement concluded.
Nnamdi Kanu was arrested in Kenya in June 2021 and brought back to Nigeria to face charges of terrorism and treasonable felony. The manner of his return sparked global controversy, with legal and human rights advocates accusing both governments of violating international law.
The Nigerian government has consistently denied any wrongdoing, maintaining that Kanu was lawfully returned to face justice.
However, Tuesday’s ruling by the Kenyan court adds legal weight to claims of extraordinary rendition and sets the stage for further international litigation and diplomatic fallout.