Nnamdi Kanu Loses Appeal Against UK Govt

A legal action filed by the leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Nnamdi Kanu against the United Kingdom (UK) government concerning his detention in Nigeria has been lost.

Kanu who is a British citizen filed a lawsuit to pressure UK government to intervene in his case with the Nigerian government.

Kanu over time has been sending a series of letters to the UK government seeking their support over his detention in Nigeria.

The IPOB leader, who felt the UK government owed him as a British citizen, had approached UK courts to obtain an order to compel the UK government to take a stand and definite action, including making public statements to condemn his detention.

He commenced his legal battle against the UK government by filing his case at a High Court in London last year.

According to Premium Times, Kanu sued the Secretary of State for the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (FCDO), also referred to as Foreign Secretary – as the representative of the UK government.

He subsequently filed an appeal at the Civil Division of the Court of Appeal, Royal Courts of Justice, in London to challenge the High Court’s decision.

The Court of Appeal affirmed the High Court’s verdict and dismissed Kanu’s appeal on 7 July, ruling that it could not interfere in the decision of the UK government on the IPOB leader’s detention and conditions in Nigeria.

The court also held that it could not force the Foreign Secretary sued by Kanu as the representative of the UK government to “reach a firm view” on the matter while the Nigerian government’s case against him was still at Nigeria’s Supreme Court.

The court ruled, “I consider, therefore, that it is not irrational for the Foreign Secretary to refrain from reaching a firm view while the matter is still properly before the Nigerian courts.”

The court also held that there was no procedural breach committed by the Foreign Secretary by refusing to make a public statement to condemn Kanu’s incarceration.

The judgement read, “Here the Respondent has given information about the steps which have been taken on Mr Kanu’s behalf; and has explained why he is unwilling to make public statements. The real complaint in this case is substantive (refusal to reach a firm view) rather than procedure.”

The case that eventually made its way to the UK courts is a fallout of irreconcilable differences between the UK’s Foreign Secretary and Kanu on the appropriate steps to take over his arrest and alleged maltreatment in Nigerian custody.

It started with the first letter by Kanu’s legal team to the Foreign Secretary shortly after the Nigerian government captured him in Kenya and brought him to Nigeria in June 2021.

The focus of the initial correspondence was to urge the British High Commission to obtain permission to visit Mr Kanu in custody at Nigeria’s State Security Service (SSS) in Abuja.

In reaction, the British High Commission requested permission by a note verbale sent on 1 July 2021 to the Nigerian government. But, for a significant period, the Nigerian authorities did not respond.

On 22 July 2021, Kanu’s lawyers sent another letter to the Foreign Secretary contending that the failure to provide consular assistance, and in particular the failure to take steps to do so beyond simply asking the Nigerian authorities, was unlawful.

The tone of the letters sent by Kanu’s legal team became more confrontational with each response from the office of the Foreign Secretary detailing the steps the government had taken to assist Kanu. The office insisted that it would continue to handle the matter as it considered best appropriate.

Two of the letters by the Foreign Secretary stood out in forming the basis for the legal action filed by Kanu’s legal team last year.

One of the letters dated 14 April 2022, responded to a suggestion by Mr Kanu’s legal team to the Foreign Secretary to reconsider its strategy for assisting Mr Kanu.

The other letter dated 9 June 2022 responded to a further pre-action protocol letter from Mr Kanu’s solicitors which was severely critical of the UK Foreign Secretary.

The responses of the Foreign Secretary’s office to the two letters are the same, insisting that it had acted most appropriately based on available information as to the position guided by international law.

Part of the letter read, “That view is subject to reassessment in light of changing information and evidence available to her. There is no obligation on the Secretary of State to share that view, the Secretary of State does not consider that it would be appropriate to do so and the Claimant (or Mr. Kanu) could not have had any legitimate expectation that this would occur.”

They also acknowledged that there were a range of diplomatic tools that could be deployed in any case where a British national was detained in another jurisdiction, but it added: “Ministers have given specific consideration to a range of alternative options, including those suggested by or on behalf of your client.”

The letter said the secretary of state did not feel obliged to give an account of actions being taken on Kanu’s matter because ministers only needed “to determine what approach is appropriate in the particular circumstances of an individual case at a particular time.”

The letters from the office of the Foreign Secretary are replete with highlights of various forms of interventions of the UK government through its officials in Mr Kanu’s matter. The separatist leader’s lawyers believed the steps were insufficient.

The correspondences highlight how the British High Commissioner raised Kanu’s case during meetings with top officials of the Nigerian government, including Ibrahim Gambari, the chief of staff to then President Muhammadu Buhari; the Attorney General of the Federation, Abubakar Malami, and the Minister of Foreign Affairs, Geoffrey Onyeama.

On one occasion, the UK foreign secretary said it sent a letter to Mr Malami to provide additional information requested by him.

On another occasion in October and November 2021, FCDO officials raised Mr Kanu’s case with Nigerian Ministry of Justice and Ministry of Foreign Affairs officials and the SSS, according to correspondences quoted in the UK Court of Appeal’s judgement.

In December 2021, the British High Commissioner met with the Chief of Staff to President Buhari over Mr Kanu’s case, and then delivered a letter to the SSS “raising specific welfare requests following our consular visit with Mr Kanu”.

“This letter made clear the UK Government’s support for Mr Kanu’s transfer out of solitary confinement,” one of the FCDO’s letters read.

Also in December 2021, the FCDO said a note verbale was sent to the Nigerian Ministry of Foreign Affairs formally requesting an explanation of how Mr Kanu was transferred to Nigeria.

It also contained a request that Mr Kanu be transferred out of solitary confinement.

Nigerian, and Kenyan officials remain defiant to the UK’s behind-the-scenes interventions

The UK government officials’ behind-the-scenes engagements with the Nigerian government continued in 2022. But they yielded no result.

The letters said, for instance, on 13 January 2022, the British High Commissioner, Catriona Laing, met Nigeria’s foreign affairs minister, Onyeama, and raised concerns about Kanu’s “ongoing solitary confinement; his health and welfare and also pressed for a response to HMG’s (UK government’s) of 14 December 2021”. They got nothing from the engagement.

When Nigerian officials were not forthcoming with information, the UK government turned to Kenya to seek insights about Kanu’s transfer from the East African country to Nigeria.

On 18 January 2022, FCDO Minister, Vicky Ford, met with the Kenyan Minister of Foreign Affairs and raised concerns regarding the transfer of Kanu from Kenya to Nigeria.

Again, on 21 January 2022, the British High Commissioner, Catriona Laing, brought up the same issues during a meeting with President Buhari’s Chief of Staff, Gambari.

Similarly, on 1 February 2022, Ms Ford raised the same issues with the Nigerian National Security Adviser and requested further consular access to Kanu, according to correspondences cited in the UK court’s judgement.

During the meeting, she also raised concerns over Kanu’s detention conditions and sought an explanation for his transfer from Kenya to Nigeria.

During an official visit to Nigeria in February 2022, Ms Ford also raised Kanu’s case during a meeting with Onyeama, requesting further consular access, and raising concerns over the conditions in which Kanu was detained. She also sought an explanation on his transfer from Kenya to Nigeria, the document stated.