Nigerian Attorney General, Malami Insults Canadian Minister Over Kanu’s Abduction

Abubakar Malami, the Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, has chastised Kelechi Madu for his remarks following the arrest of Nnamdi Kanu.

Madu, the Minister of Justice and Solicitor-General of the Government of Alberta, Canada, criticised Malami over the IPOB leader’s repatriation.

Malami, he said, was a disgrace to the rule of law and unfit to serve as a court official.

“He has shown himself to be a bigot who does not understand what it means to live in a pluralistic society governed by the dictates of the rule of law,” Madu’s statement read.

Malami responded on Wednesday, calling the Canadian state official an ignoramus and oddball whose ideas are unusual in the legal profession.

Madu’s criticism of the internationally recognized method by which Kanu, who had escaped bail, was re-arrested and brought back to face trial, is unfortunate, according to the AGF.

“It was abundantly clear that bench warrant was lawfully and judiciously procured through judicial process by a competent court of law, whose bail condition Nnamdi Kanu breached with impunity.

“There was no illegality in the entire process and the question of illegality does not even arise. It is a common principle of the law that he who comes to equity must come with clean hands,” Malami said.

Malami said Kanu has enjoyed representation by counsel of his choice and was never denied a right of choice of counsel or recourse to one, even when he symbolises a proscribed association (IPOB).

“Where was the so-called Madu when Nnamdi Kanu was inciting violence against the country? Why, as a lawyer, would Madu support a fugitive who jumped bail and accused of terrorism and treasonable felony? What stopped Madu from voicing out dissent on the atrocities of Kanu and their group?

“It is important to educate the likes of Keleche Madu that both Nigeria (his country of birth) and Canada (where he claims to be practising law) are signatories to the Multinational Treaty Agreement where, among others, fugitive fleeing justice in nations with similar agreement could be brought back to face justice.

“It is a pity that as a Solicitor General of a province, Madu failed to keep himself acquainted with the provisions of general laws of the country where he stays as well as international laws.

“We wish to draw the attention of Madu to the provisions of Consolidated Act Criminal Code under the Canadian Law R.S., C 1985, c. C-46:1-2 on Treason and other Offences vis:

“46(1) Every one commits high treason who, in Canada: (a) Kills or attempts to kill Her Majesty or does her any bodily harm tending to death or destruction, maims or wounds her, or imprisons or restrains her,

“(b) Levels war against Canada or does any act thereto; or (C) Assist an enemy at war with Canada or any armed forces against whom Canadian Forces are engaged in hostilities, whether or not a state of war exists between Canada and the country whose forces they are. 46(2) Every one commits treason who, in Canada (a) Use force or violence for the purpose of overthrowing the government of Canada or a province;

“(b) Without lawful authority, communicates or makes available to an agent of a state other than Canada, military or scientific information or any sketch, plan, model, article, note or document of a military or scientific character that he knows or ought to know may be used by that state for a purpose prejudicial to the safety of defence of Canada;

“(c) Conspires with any person to commit high treason or do anything mentioned in paragraph; (d ) Forms an intention to do anything that is high treason or that is mentioned in paragraph; (e) Conspires with any person to do anything mentioned in paragraph (b) or forms an intention to do anything mentioned in paragraph (b) and manifests intention by and overt act.”

Malami further derided Madu, saying “empty vessel makes loudest noise.”

“We advise the so-called ‘learned man’ to shelve his arrogance and learn to study the law books before opening his mouth to disgrace himself before the right thinking members of the society thereby attracting to himself criticism that may propel doubt about his suitability for the job he claims to be doing now, after moving out of his country of origin in which he fails to excel,” the reply concluded.