The Nnamdi Kanu counsel, Aloy Ejimakor has said that his client is still technically in Kenya.
NEWS MAIL NG reports that the lawyer in a statement said since Nnamdi Kanu was travelling with a British passport, he should have been taken back to Britain not Nigeria.
Ejimakor, in a statement he signed entitled: “Kanu is technically still in Kenya,” said it was dubious that Kenya attributed Kanu’s citizenship to Nigeria because it’s his place of birth.
The statement reads partly: “Yes, that’s right: In the purest interpretations of foreign relations law, as applied to Britain and Kenya, Mazi Nnamdi Kanu is technically speaking, still in Kenya. How? Dual national or not, Kanu departed Britain and travelled to Kenya as a British citizen and Kenya admitted him as such. That’s the starting point.
“So, after his admission to Kenya, it happens that Kanu must be expelled from Kenyan soil (with or without due process), the next natural and legal thing to do is for Kenya to expel him to Britain, not Nigeria. Choosing to expel him to Nigeria means that he could’ve also been expelled to any other country than Nigeria.
“Why? Because Kanu presented himself to Kenya as a British citizen, not a Nigerian citizen or even a dual citizen. In international law, it was clearly a three-way immigration contract between Kanu, Britain and Kenya. Nigeria was not a party to it; and Nigeria was never in reckoning at the Kenyan port of entry when Kanu presented himself for admission. Lawyers call it the privity of contract.
Buhari govt vs Nnamdi Kanu: Why there’ll be challenges in court – Lawyer
“Counting from the time of Kanu’s abduction to the infamous rendition, Kenya sighted no other travel document that could’ve, in addition to Britain, attributed another nationality to Kanu, including that of Nigeria. Or, was Kanu admitted to Kenya on a Nigerian birth certificate?
“So, it’s dubious that Kenya attributed Nigerian citizenship to Kanu because sponsors of the abduction and rendition presumably told Kenya that Kanu was born in Nigeria.”