₦airaland Forum

I am nnamdi Kanu
Nobody can sentence ME
Ordinary chest beater
He is running kiti kata to stop judgment.
Nobody get time for him empty chest anymore
Let the court put the case to rest and sentence the werey to life imprisonment.

Check out this clip


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VsN5mbN8DWE?si=kAo4oJe7vyEN06x4

Thank you

Bros is going to prison. The Federal government is going to use him to serve as a detergent to others like him.

Shebi MNK had already bypassed the Court of Appeal by approaching the SC in a case that the FHC that had not yet even delivered?

Which back kain back and forth be dis?

MNK, be calming down.

There are court processes which should be followed sequentially and not randomly.

This is one of the consequences of sacking his defense legal team.

Truly, the man is a lay man when it comes to law.

E dey think sey the law courts na Onitsha market.

Chai!


Kikikiki-kakakaka!!! kiokiokio-kwakwakwa!!!





@hotseat

Baba dey fear prison....
That his suit will now be changed to prison gown

And other terrorists that have been arrested have never been tried like this,but because he's from a particular region they so much hate him and want to see him to the ground. Kanu is never the problem of naija,boko haram and Fulani herdsmen are. Make una free this man!

Sirjamo:
Few years ago, the idiot was on radio Biafra Roaring like a lion. He said he was ready to die for the course. Ordinary prison, he's running from one court to another.

Thank God. This time around, he's not going to get the chance to run away like Ojukwu. Cowards everywhere.

I see what you did there

Josywhyte:
And other terrorists that have been arrested have never been tried like this,but because he's from a particular region they so much hate him and want to see him to the ground. Kanu is never the problem of naija,boko haram and Fulani herdsmen are. Make una free this man!

You are right

But tell him to collect his judgement on the 20th first. Shebi him be superhero

amaridigital:
Correction! There's a fundamental error in the upbringing of ALL NYAMIRIS

That exactly was what was in mind, but I just say make dodge the BOT small, na im I con manage that soft landing. But na as you talkam. Kobo sense no dey dem brain sam sam.

Abbeytoy:
They should jail this guy once and for all

200 years will be okay

Putindbutt:
A very cornfused n!ggar, I thought last week he and his illiterate followers were dancing in front of Supreme Court when he went to file a charge to stop his trial. So why has he danced back to the court of appeal?. There must be something about the colour of the beans water this man is eating in jail, it is making him really cornfused. Four more days to the D-day, that your Fendi will be changed to prison uniform.
Senior Advocate of I.pob

My brother, I hold no grudge against your position on MNK, at least there is freedom of speech.

But I want you to be worried that you are a citizen of a country that doesn't respect her laws and citizen. Be worried that this country can treat you worst tomorrow than they are treating MNK today.

Call injustice what it is. Your support for oppression is evil, because what goes around comes around.

Remember the court have freed this man before yet you believe he is guilty and should be crucified right?

Carry on!

Can the appelete court grant a stay of execution on an ongoing case in the federal high court?

The answer is YES and NO.

What the Nigerian Constitution / Law doesn’t Automatically Give

1. No Automatic Stay on Appeal

Filing a Notice of Appeal does not automatically stay (i.e., pause) the lower court’s proceedings or its delivery of judgment.

A court (e.g., appeal court) must grant a formal stay order (sometimes called “stay of proceedings” or “stay of execution”) for the lower court to be restrained from continuing or executing its judgment.



2. Discretionary Remedy

The power to grant a stay is a discretionary power: courts do not grant it as a matter of course.

The applicant (i.e., the party seeking the stay) must usually show “exceptional” or “special” circumstances to justify restraining further proceedings.

There must be a pending appeal that is valid and arguable.



3. Preserving the “Res” / Status Quo

One of the reasons a court can grant a stay is to preserve the “res” (i.e., the subject matter of the dispute), so that, if the appeal succeeds, the lower court’s decision will not have destroyed or rendered the appeal meaningless.

If there is likely to be greater hardship or prejudice by granting a stay, the court may refuse it.

Also, if the appeal raises a question of jurisdiction (i.e., the lower court may not have had proper jurisdiction), that strengthens the case for a stay.



4. Legal Basis / Case Law

In Kigo v Holman Brothers, the Court of Appeal granted an “interim order of stay of further proceedings.”

In practice, stay-of-proceedings applications have been granted in Nigerian courts, including to stop further steps in the lower court pending appeal.

The Court of Appeal Act and other rules give the appeal court (or other courts) power related to appellate remedies.





---

Constitutional / Hierarchical Context

The 1999 Constitution (as amended) provides for appeals from the Federal High Court to the Court of Appeal.

But the Constitution itself does not explicitly provide that the mere lodging of an appeal stays all proceedings; rather, the mechanism to “pause” is through the court’s inherent or statutory power to grant a stay.



---

Bottom Line

Yes, an appellate court (or sometimes even the trial court) can stop further proceedings (or execution) in the Federal High Court, but only if a proper application for a stay is made and the court grants it.

This is not automatic just because an appeal is filed.

The applicant must demonstrate special or exceptional circumstances, and usually show that the appeal is not frivolous (i.e., it is arguable), among other things.

Abemy:
Can the appelete court grant a stay of execution on an ongoing case in the federal high court?

The answer is YES and NO.

What the Nigerian Constitution / Law doesn’t Automatically Give

1. No Automatic Stay on Appeal

Filing a Notice of Appeal does not automatically stay (i.e., pause) the lower court’s proceedings or its delivery of judgment.

A court (e.g., appeal court) must grant a formal stay order (sometimes called “stay of proceedings” or “stay of execution”) for the lower court to be restrained from continuing or executing its judgment.



2. Discretionary Remedy

The power to grant a stay is a discretionary power: courts do not grant it as a matter of course.

The applicant (i.e., the party seeking the stay) must usually show “exceptional” or “special” circumstances to justify restraining further proceedings.

There must be a pending appeal that is valid and arguable.



3. Preserving the “Res” / Status Quo

One of the reasons a court can grant a stay is to preserve the “res” (i.e., the subject matter of the dispute), so that, if the appeal succeeds, the lower court’s decision will not have destroyed or rendered the appeal meaningless.

If there is likely to be greater hardship or prejudice by granting a stay, the court may refuse it.

Also, if the appeal raises a question of jurisdiction (i.e., the lower court may not have had proper jurisdiction), that strengthens the case for a stay.



4. Legal Basis / Case Law

In Kigo v Holman Brothers, the Court of Appeal granted an “interim order of stay of further proceedings.”

In practice, stay-of-proceedings applications have been granted in Nigerian courts, including to stop further steps in the lower court pending appeal.

The Court of Appeal Act and other rules give the appeal court (or other courts) power related to appellate remedies.





---

Constitutional / Hierarchical Context

The 1999 Constitution (as amended) provides for appeals from the Federal High Court to the Court of Appeal.

But the Constitution itself does not explicitly provide that the mere lodging of an appeal stays all proceedings; rather, the mechanism to “pause” is through the court’s inherent or statutory power to grant a stay.



---

Bottom Line

Yes, an appellate court (or sometimes even the trial court) can stop further proceedings (or execution) in the Federal High Court, but only if a proper application for a stay is made and the court grants it.

This is not automatic just because an appeal is filed.

The applicant must demonstrate special or exceptional circumstances, and usually show that the appeal is not frivolous (i.e., it is arguable), among other things.

What Recent Law / Rules Show (2023–2025)

1. Supreme Court Rules (2024)

Under the new Supreme Court Rules, 2024, Order 7, Rule 2(2) explicitly provides that:

> “the proceedings in any matter before the Court below … shall not be stayed in any form to await the outcome of an interlocutory appeal to this Court.”



This means for interlocutory appeals to the Supreme Court, the lower court’s proceedings are generally not automatically stayed.

That is a fairly strong rule: merely filing an interlocutory appeal to SC does not, under the 2024 Rules, suspend the trial court’s process by default.



2. Supreme Court’s General Powers (under the same rules)

The Supreme Court still has powers under its Act / from legislation (“S. 22 Supreme Court Act”) to make “necessary orders … pending the determination of an appeal,” such as injunctions, “upon the fulfilment of … conditions” (e.g., an undertaking).

In other words: you can apply to the Supreme Court for an order (e.g., stay), but there's no guarantee, and there are criteria / conditions (e.g., giving an undertaking, showing hardship, etc.).



3. Lower-Court Discretion & Principles

From a judgment on the National Industrial Court (NICN) (or similar) recently: the court reiterated key guiding principles for stays:

There must be a valid and competent pending appeal.

There must be “special and exceptional circumstances” for staying proceedings.

The appeal must be arguable (i.e., not frivolous) so that granting the stay makes sense.

The court should consider the competing hardship: whether granting the stay causes more prejudice than refusing it.

Preservation of the “res” (the subject matter) is often a reason to grant a stay.

The discretion to stay must be exercised “judicially and judiciously.”


Also, in a Federal Capital Territory (FCT) High Court case (2025), the court refused to stay execution just because a “mere Notice of Appeal” was filed:

> “This Court shall not … Stay Execution … just because the Judgment Debtor filed a mere Notice of Appeal … there is no evidence … that the Record of Appeal has been transmitted to the Court of Appeal … this Court shall not grant the Stay of Execution …”



That suggests that more than just filing a notice is needed: courts want to see that the appellate process is actually in motion (record transmitted, appellate court “seised” of the appeal).



4. Example: Federal High Court Proceeding Despite Appeal

In Yahaya Bello’s money-laundering case, the Federal High Court (Abuja) continued the trial even though Bello had filed an appeal to the Court of Appeal (on jurisdiction, etc.).

The trial judge explicitly said that grant of stay is discretionary, and just filing an appeal is not enough:

> “The grant of stay of proceedings is at the court’s discretion … no one can give an authority … The judge only needs to exercise this power judicially.”



This is quite illustrative: even in a high-profile criminal case, the lower court did not simply stop just because there was an appeal.



5. Supreme Court Statutory Power to Stay Execution

According to a more recent published Act (or amendment), the Supreme Court may grant a “stay of execution … either unconditionally or upon the performance of such conditions” under its appeal jurisdiction.

This shows there is a statutory basis for the SC to stop execution of a lower court’s decision, under conditions.





---

Analysis & Interpretation

Trend: The rules and recent practice lean against automatic stays. Especially with the 2024 Supreme Court Rules, it is more difficult to argue that an interlocutory appeal should freeze lower-court proceedings as of right.

Strategic Implication: If someone wants to stop a Federal High Court from delivering judgment (or further proceedings) pending an appeal:

1. They should apply proactively for a stay (or interlocutory injunction) — not rely on the appeal alone.


2. They need to provide strong justification: show why there is a real risk of irreparable harm, that the appeal is arguable, and possibly give an undertaking.


3. They should ensure the record of appeal is transmitted to the appellate court, because some lower courts treat “no record yet” as a ground to refuse stay.



Risk: If the lower court refuses to stay, it might continue to date hearings or even pass judgment, and then the appeal might be less useful (especially if the judgment is executed or enforced).



---

Conclusion

Yes, there are recent legal developments (especially with the 2024 Rules) that limit the ability of an appellate court (or a party) to automatically pause a lower court’s proceedings just by filing an appeal.

But there is still legal and statutory power (in the Supreme Court Act, and in court discretion) for a stay to be granted — just that it’s more controlled / conditional now.

In practice (e.g., Yahaya Bello’s case), lower courts continue to sometimes reject stay applications despite pending appeals.

GrammarNazi1:
The country should conclude this case.

20th of November

Josywhyte:
And other terrorists that have been arrested have never been tried like this,but because he's from a particular region they so much hate him and want to see him to the ground. Kanu is never the problem of naija,boko haram and Fulani herdsmen are. Make una free this man!

So you agree that Nnamdi Kanu is a terrorist?

Putindbutt:
https://www.thisdaylive.com/2025/11/12/alleged-terrorism-nnamdi-kanu-asks-appeal-court-to-stop-fhc-judgment/

Nnamdi Kanu is running away from the Judgment Day! It will come. He can then appeal the judgment if it goes against his expectation. Interlocutory appeals no longer have a place in criminal trials as they are to be taken in the envisaged appeal after final judgment. Nnamdi Kanu and his lawyers minus Chief Agabi who excused himself from the mess are a bunch of clowns!

Abemy:
What Recent Law / Rules Show (2023–2025)

1. Supreme Court Rules (2024)

Under the new Supreme Court Rules, 2024, Order 7, Rule 2(2) explicitly provides that:

> “the proceedings in any matter before the Court below … shall not be stayed in any form to await the outcome of an interlocutory appeal to this Court.”



This means for interlocutory appeals to the Supreme Court, the lower court’s proceedings are generally not automatically stayed.

That is a fairly strong rule: merely filing an interlocutory appeal to SC does not, under the 2024 Rules, suspend the trial court’s process by default.



2. Supreme Court’s General Powers (under the same rules)

The Supreme Court still has powers under its Act / from legislation (“S. 22 Supreme Court Act”) to make “necessary orders … pending the determination of an appeal,” such as injunctions, “upon the fulfilment of … conditions” (e.g., an undertaking).

In other words: you can apply to the Supreme Court for an order (e.g., stay), but there's no guarantee, and there are criteria / conditions (e.g., giving an undertaking, showing hardship, etc.).



3. Lower-Court Discretion & Principles

From a judgment on the National Industrial Court (NICN) (or similar) recently: the court reiterated key guiding principles for stays:

There must be a valid and competent pending appeal.

There must be “special and exceptional circumstances” for staying proceedings.

The appeal must be arguable (i.e., not frivolous) so that granting the stay makes sense.

The court should consider the competing hardship: whether granting the stay causes more prejudice than refusing it.

Preservation of the “res” (the subject matter) is often a reason to grant a stay.

The discretion to stay must be exercised “judicially and judiciously.”


Also, in a Federal Capital Territory (FCT) High Court case (2025), the court refused to stay execution just because a “mere Notice of Appeal” was filed:

> “This Court shall not … Stay Execution … just because the Judgment Debtor filed a mere Notice of Appeal … there is no evidence … that the Record of Appeal has been transmitted to the Court of Appeal … this Court shall not grant the Stay of Execution …”



That suggests that more than just filing a notice is needed: courts want to see that the appellate process is actually in motion (record transmitted, appellate court “seised” of the appeal).



4. Example: Federal High Court Proceeding Despite Appeal

In Yahaya Bello’s money-laundering case, the Federal High Court (Abuja) continued the trial even though Bello had filed an appeal to the Court of Appeal (on jurisdiction, etc.).

The trial judge explicitly said that grant of stay is discretionary, and just filing an appeal is not enough:

> “The grant of stay of proceedings is at the court’s discretion … no one can give an authority … The judge only needs to exercise this power judicially.”



This is quite illustrative: even in a high-profile criminal case, the lower court did not simply stop just because there was an appeal.



5. Supreme Court Statutory Power to Stay Execution

According to a more recent published Act (or amendment), the Supreme Court may grant a “stay of execution … either unconditionally or upon the performance of such conditions” under its appeal jurisdiction.

This shows there is a statutory basis for the SC to stop execution of a lower court’s decision, under conditions.





---

Analysis & Interpretation

Trend: The rules and recent practice lean against automatic stays. Especially with the 2024 Supreme Court Rules, it is more difficult to argue that an interlocutory appeal should freeze lower-court proceedings as of right.

Strategic Implication: If someone wants to stop a Federal High Court from delivering judgment (or further proceedings) pending an appeal:

1. They should apply proactively for a stay (or interlocutory injunction) — not rely on the appeal alone.


2. They need to provide strong justification: show why there is a real risk of irreparable harm, that the appeal is arguable, and possibly give an undertaking.


3. They should ensure the record of appeal is transmitted to the appellate court, because some lower courts treat “no record yet” as a ground to refuse stay.



Risk: If the lower court refuses to stay, it might continue to date hearings or even pass judgment, and then the appeal might be less useful (especially if the judgment is executed or enforced).



---

Conclusion

Yes, there are recent legal developments (especially with the 2024 Rules) that limit the ability of an appellate court (or a party) to automatically pause a lower court’s proceedings just by filing an appeal.

But there is still legal and statutory power (in the Supreme Court Act, and in court discretion) for a stay to be granted — just that it’s more controlled / conditional now.

In practice (e.g., Yahaya Bello’s case), lower courts continue to sometimes reject stay applications despite pending appeals.

It is not difficult to see that no exceptional circumstances exist to warrant the stay of proceedings or arrest the judgment of the FHC. The facts are all in the open. It is beyond question that Nnamdi Kanu is filibustering!

ShoeMarket:
My brother, I hold no grudge against your position on MNK, at least there is freedom of speech.

But I want you to be worried that you are a citizen of a country that doesn't respect her laws and citizen. Be worried that this country can treat you worst tomorrow than they are treating MNK today.

Call injustice what it is. Your support for oppression is evil, because what goes around comes around.

Remember the court have freed this man before yet you believe he is guilty and should be crucified right?

Carry on!

Stop the lies. He was not freed. That was the IPOB version of the story

You can only wish and after that you go and sleep.

Flangelo12:
Face your trial and stop looking for excuses.

Shebi Nigeria no know law?

Nigeria know law before?

Let's watch and see how yorobah prezident and judge go jail Kanu just like that.

Even he is send to prison at least he is still better than you the jobless one that spend all your youthful years here on nairaland to insult the IBO's. Nnamdi Kalu is an IPOB leader, a qualified lawyer by profession. 2 first class degrees holder. Please introduce who you are let us check something.

enemyofprogress:
Bros is going to prison. The Federal government is going to use him to serve as a detergent to others like him.

...deterrent...

Kingosytex:
...deterrent...

both of them are correct. One is British English, while the other one is American English, I chose to use the American English which is my mother tongue.

Okoroawusa:
So you agree that Nnamdi Kanu is a terrorist?

Not only a terrorist, but a terrorist founder!

AareGaa:
It's concluded already.
Kanu will spend the rest of his delusional life in prison

In your mind

DomPerignon:
All these should have been used in opening and closing your defense which you refused to do even after several warnings and postponements by Justice Omotosho advising from the bench that you should reconsider opting out of presenting your defense and consider hiring back your lawyers which you stubbornly refused.

How can an Appeal Court now sit over a case that is yet to be concluded in the High Court?

How can this, how can that. In Nigeria anything goes. The same NIgerian court has discharged and acquitted him yet, they keep going back and forth with this man. Don't be surprised they will grant his request. Anything that will keep the case lingering is welcome by both sides. Even the Omotosho of a judge is afraid to land the hammer considering what they feel that might be the outcome. Dey play

123yes:
Even he is send to prison at least he is still better than you the jobless one that spend all your youthful years here on nairaland to insult the IBO's. Nnamdi Kalu is an IPOB leader, a qualified lawyer by profession. 2 first class degrees holder. Please introduce who you are let us check something.

Nothing to introduce, just an average unknown fellow whose existence is nothing to the federal government.

Reptyle:
I think this man is just waking up to realize that some of the charges against him mean he will spend the remaining part of his life in jail if judged guilty. He should have just briefed his lawyers and allowed them do their job, but no! Now he is running all over the place shopping for injunctions and rulings from the same courts and justice system he consistently denigrates.

The same court and justice system that already discharged and acquitted him. Going back and forth

Santalpharay:
How can this, how can that. In Nigeria anything goes. The same NIgerian court has discharged and acquitted him yet, they keep going back and forth with this man. Don't be surprised they will grant his request. Anything that will keep the case lingering is welcome by both sides. Even the Omotosho of a judge is afraid to land the hammer considering what they feel that might be the outcome. Dey play

No court has ever discharged and acquitted him.

I urge the Federal Government to release this man immediately.
This man is obviously having some mental issues, he should be put in the psychiatric ward of kuje.
Kanu is mentally unstable.

Santalpharay:
The same court and justice system that already discharged and acquitted him. Going back and forth

The often cited Court of Appeal judgement of 13 October 2022 (CA/ABJ/CR/625/2022) did not "discharge and acquit" Mr. Kanu because there was essentially no trial in the real sense of the word. The Appeal Court instead struck out the 7 counts out of the original 15, that had been left standing by the Federal High Court judgement of April 8 2022 by Justice Binta Nyako.

The Supreme Court however overruled the Appeal Court on 15 December 2023 (SC/CR/1364/2022), reinstating the 7 counts that had been struck out by the Appeal Court and referring th3 case back to the High Court for trial, which is what is going on now.

So NO, Mr. Kanu wasn't discharged and acquited. He was discharged without prejudice by the Appeal Court because it ruled that the charges against him were "incompetent" and struck them out. This ruling was overturned by the Supreme Court, instructing the parties to return to the High Court for the trial proper.