1

I had initially intended to remain silent regarding the #FreeNnamdikanu movement, particularly concerning the protest scheduled for October 20th, 2025. However, numerous close associates expressed a strong desire for me to contribute my viewpoint to the national protest call initiated by Omoyele Sowore. This persistent encouragement from my trusted circle, coupled with the new trend of NANS, Ọhaneze Youth and Northern Youth Wings joining the protest, ultimately swayed my decision to break my silence and offer my insights on this significant matter. The widespread interest among my peers underscored the importance of the issue and the expectation that I, too, should lend my voice to the ongoing discourse.

The subject of Mazi Nnamdi Kanu (MNK) is far from a novel topic for me; in fact, it represents a recurring theme in my public commentary. I distinctly recall that as far back as July 10th, 2021, I posed a critical question that I believed should have formed the foundational premise for any legitimate legal discussions in a civilised society: “was Mazi Nnamdi Kanu (MNK) arrested, abducted or kidnapped?”.

This particular inquiry, in my estimation, ought to have served as the cornerstone for all subsequent legal deliberations, providing a crucial starting point for an objective and fair assessment of the circumstances surrounding his apprehension irrespective of his alleged sins.

The precise nature of his acquisition, whether through a lawful arrest, an unauthorised abduction, or an outright kidnapping, holds profound implications for the legality of his current detention and the entire judicial process.

The specific nature of any alleged crime that MNK might have committed, regardless of its severity or perceived gravity, should not overshadow the fundamental principles of due process and international law. We may not appreciate his method of agitation, but it is an undeniable fact that there exist numerous established international laws and well-defined legal mechanisms for the prosecution of individuals residing in the diaspora. These frameworks are designed to ensure that justice is pursued through legitimate and internationally recognized channels, upholding the sovereignty of nations and the rights of individuals.

However, when an individual is demonstrably abducted or kidnapped through illicit means, as was explicitly highlighted and confirmed by a Kenyan Court in MNK’s case, the entire process of his detention and subsequent legal proceedings becomes inherently unlawful and illegitimate. The findings of the Kenyan Court, which unequivocally pointed to illegal methods in his transfer, render his continued custody a violation of established legal norms and international conventions.

In the actual sense of decency, and in adherence to the principles of justice and human rights, the federal government should have issued a formal apology. The international community’s collective outcry and strong disapproval of the manner in which he was brought into custody served as a clear indicator of the egregious nature of the act. A sincere apology from the federal government would not only have acknowledged the grave error committed but also demonstrated a commitment to upholding international law and respecting human rights, thereby mitigating the damage to its international reputation.

The failure to offer such an apology, despite the overwhelming evidence and international pressure, further compounds the perception of impropriety surrounding the entire affair. The global condemnation was not merely a matter of opinion but a reflection of a broad consensus among legal experts and human rights organizations that the actions taken were in direct contravention of established legal protocols and ethical standards. This widespread disapproval underscored the severity of the incident and the imperative for a formal acknowledgment of wrongdoing.

I have meticulously predicted and carefully considered that MNK, a perceived enemy of FGN, may indeed be seen by some as merely a solitary individual operating in isolation, a lone voice crying out in the vast wilderness of political discourse. However, it is absolutely crucial to understand that his exceptional qualities, particularly his unwavering resilience and profound determination, cannot and should not be trivialized or dismissed lightly. He is, in essence, far more complex and influential than what superficial observations might suggest, embodying a spirit and a cause that resonate deeply with a significant portion of the populace of Igbo race.
This individual is demonstrably not an ordinary person; his actions and steadfast principles set him apart. A man who has consistently and resolutely refused numerous overtures and various forms of inducements, including substantial gifts, solely to avoid abandoning his fervent agitation concerning the systemic marginalisation of his people, must never be underestimated or taken for granted.

What initially commenced as a localised and seemingly contained legal battle, primarily centered on the contentious detention of this one man, MNK, way back in 2015, has, by the year 2025, dramatically evolved into a profound national mirror. This mirror now starkly reflects the inherent fragility of Nigeria, exposing the deep-seated tensions and fundamental disagreements that exist between the governed populace and those who hold the reins of governmental power.

Before any accusations are leveled against me, suggesting that I harbor tribalistic prejudices or that I am an ardent supporter of Mazi Nnamdi Kanu (MNK), it is imperative that the unvarnished truth be articulated and acknowledged. The fundamental principle that must be upheld is that, it is unequivocally illegal and unlawful to engage in the act of kidnapping or abducting any individual who stands accused of any crime, regardless of the nature or severity of the alleged offense. The gravity of the transgression, no matter how heinous it may appear, does not diminish the inherent rights of the accused. Every suspect, without exception, must be afforded the utmost dignity and respect throughout the legal process.

The current course of action, characterised by his continued detention, represents an exceptionally heinous assault on the fundamental rights of a suspect, especially one who is known to be grappling with significant health challenges. Furthermore, the state has demonstrably refused to grant him the necessary permission to seek medical treatment at a hospital of his own choice, thereby exacerbating his precarious health situation and further infringing upon his basic human rights.

Concurrently, within the very same nation, a sad and deeply troubling dichotomy exists. Certain states are openly engaging in social interactions and negotiations, effectively “dining and winning,” with individuals who are widely recognized as full-fledged terrorists and bandits. These interactions are occurring in full public view, and, with an allegations of governmen­ts paying ransoms. These are murderers, kidnappers, rapists and full grown criminals being accorded full government embrace with much funfair.

This can be likened to the recent ugly uproar by the citizens against Mr President’s recent amnesty list, where, out of the 175 Nigerians on the list, more than half were murderers, hardened criminals and druggies. A clear case of a clemency that mocked our judiciary, and equally showcased a societal moral decline. A national embrassment by a president who has a serious drug related allegation issue in the United States. Sadly, the Renewed Hope Agenda has invariably become a Renewed Hope for Criminality, and the fight for corruption has become an opium for funfair. A miscalculation that has probably galvanize a new terrorist group known as Wulowulo, allegedly linked to Boko Haram in North-Central Nigeria.

This glaring and morally reprehensible display of double standards is precisely the underlying motivation that has compelled me to reflect and dig deeper into the morality values expected from the forthcoming national protest, which aims to secure the release of MNK.

The critical observation, however, is that the majority of influential figures, including Governors, National Assembly members, political leaders, traditional rulers (Nd’Eze), and religious leaders from the Southeast, have maintained a conspicuous silence, with only a few exceptions. Their lack of response to Sowore’s appeal for a national protest suggests an underlying, tacit agreement that MNK’s prolonged detention may be rooted in the actions of saboteurs within the region itself.

The protest, therefore, is not merely about one individual; it is about challenging the systemic flaws and the selective application of justice that undermine the very foundations of a fair and equitable society.

It became very uncomfortable for the Supreme Court to import the doctrine of, “male captus bene detentus— “wrongly captured, rightly detained”—in its December 15, 2023 judgment in FRN v. Nnamdi Kanu (SC/CR/1364/2022). A situation that many analysts have attributed to the Revival of ‘Colonial – era Doctrine’.
A sinister Doctrine that was enacted by the British Colonial government that was enforced by the British Colonial Masters, who ‘wrongly captured’ Nigeria and labeled it as ‘rightly detained’.

The collective voice of the people, expressed through peaceful but resolute protest, can be a potent force for change, compelling those in power to address these critical issues and uphold the principles of justice and human rights for all.

This impending national protest, therefore, serves as a critical test case, a definitive litmus test for the very nature and quality of the democracy we currently practice and uphold in Nigeria. It will unequivocally reveal whether our democratic system is one that genuinely allows for and facilitates peaceful protest, with security personnel demonstrating restraint and actively avoiding the use of force or “trigger-happy” actions, thereby ensuring safe access and passage for the protesters to express their grievances. Alternatively, it will expose whether our democracy is one that, regrettably, promotes and condones brutality as a primary means of control, thereby signaling a dangerous shift towards the characteristics of a dictatorial regime.
The manner in which this protest is managed will be a clear indicator of the democratic health of the nation.

The ultimate decision regarding the release or the continued detention of this one man, MNK, should under no circumstances be allowed to become the catalyst or the primary reason for yet another generation of bloodshed, conflict, and profound suffering within our beloved nation. The lessons of history must be heeded to prevent a recurrence of past tragedies.

A system of justice that lacks fairness inevitably fosters resentment and can lead to widespread civil disobedience or outright rebellion, and the consequences of such widespread unrest are invariably catastrophic for the entire nation.

As I conclude, let it be known that, the path chosen by those in power will determine whether the nation moves towards greater stability and unity, or descends further into discord and instability.

The responsibility to timely release of MNK now rests squarely on the shoulders of the leadership to demonstrate a profound understanding of the gravity of the situation and to act decisively to restore faith in the institutions of justice, thereby safeguarding the lives and properties of all citizens. The implications of his choice will be far-reaching and equally shape the destiny of Nigeria for generations to come.
My simple prayer is that our leaders, security agencies and judiciary will heed to a simple counsel for HEALING rather than resorting to HATRED. As Nigerians anxiously await, and our leaders decisively reflect, I want to assure you that, I come in PEACE.

Dr. Sunny Oby Maduka (DSM), is an Author, Resource Personality, Management Consultant/ Trainer, Chartered/Certified – Au d i t o r / A c c o u n t a n t , Financial Compliance Expert, Economic/Political Analyst Strategist, Marine Expert and Motivationist)