Broadcasters
The recurring argument that judicial decisions in Nigeria, particularly in high-profile treason cases, are merely ethnic hit jobs orchestrated by rival groups is historically inaccurate and politically toxic. The most powerful refutation of this narrative lies in the past: the 1963 conviction of Chief Obafemi Awolowo.
The Awolowo Precedent: Political Use of the Judiciary
While Justice George Sodeinde Sowemimo, who delivered the guilty verdict against Awolowo, shared the same ethnic origin as the political giant, this ruling was not an act of ethnic loyalty; it was an act of political motivation. The Balewa government, Awolowo’s political rival, used the legal mechanism of the state to neutralize the most formidable opposition figure in the country. Awolowo was jailed for life for treasonable felony, a clear demonstration that state power, when abused, will target anyone, irrespective of the judge’s tribe.
This precedent establishes two crucial facts:
Judicial decisions are institutional acts, not ethnic decrees. A judge’s primary allegiance is to the law (or, tragically, to the political powers of the day), not to their ethnic group.
Treason is a recurring feature of Nigerian politics. The state has historically used treason charges to suppress opponents and maintain control.
The Kanu Case: Focusing on Consequences, Not Origin
The historical context of Awolowo’s trial makes the current “hullabaloo” about the ethnicity of the judge in the Nnamdi Kanu case completely irrelevant and deeply distracting. If we accept that Awolowo’s conviction was politically motivated, then the focus on the judge’s background is misplaced; the focus should be on the political use and legal process applied in the current case.
Furthermore, those who focus on the judge’s origin ignore the devastating real-world consequences flowing from the charges against Kanu. The issue is not merely one of dissent but one of alleged incitement that has led to:
Economic Paralysis: The enforced ‘sit-at-home’ orders paralyzed the economy of the entire South East, costing billions and destroying countless livelihoods.
Loss of Life: The escalation of violence, allegedly perpetrated by the Eastern Security Network (ESN) or affiliated groups, has resulted in the tragic deaths of civilians, security personnel, and community leaders.
The question should not be why a judge of a certain ethnicity is trying a citizen accused of treason. The more critical question is why there is a political and media frenzy that attempts to shield a leader from legal scrutiny when their alleged actions have caused such widespread death and economic devastation within their own region.
Treason, regardless of the judge’s tribe, is a severe crime against the state. The debate must be moved away from divisive ethnic rivalry and refocused entirely on the rule of law, the evidence presented, and the need for accountability for the paralysis and violence witnessed in the South East.
