NMA Member Challenges Power Of Medical Body To Inspect Health Status Of IPOB Leader, Kanu

By Ayodele Oni

A neck Surgeon and member, Nigeria Medical Association, (NMA) Dr. Adefolaseye Adebayo, has challenged the power of the medical body to declare a person fit to stand for trial.

Reacting to the recommendation of the NMA team, which certified detained leader of Indigenous People of Biafra, (IPOB), Nnamdi Kanu fit to stand trial, Adebayo maintained that there is no section of NMA which confers such responsibility on it.

The Nigerian Medical Association (NMA), mandated by the Court to ascertain the state of health of the IPOB leader  declared that Kanu is medically fit to stand trial, following a thorough medical evaluation ordered by the Federal High Court in Abuja.

In a report submitted to the court, the NMA stated that Kanu’s current health condition is not life-threatening and that he is stable enough to continue his trial under the supervision of medical professionals within the Department of State Services (DSS) facility.

The submission follows a directive issued on September 26, 2025, by Justice James Omotosho, who had ordered the NMA president to constitute an independent medical panel to assess Kanu’s health.

In an open letter to the NMA President, Prof. Bala Mohammed Audu, the medical expert pointed out that “The NMA, as a professional body, does not issue such declarations in its institutional capacity unless the Association is merely acting as an administrative conduit to nominate experts.

The letter stated that “I write to you as a concerned and committed member of our great Association, the Nigerian Medical Association (NMA). Recent reports in the national media have attributed to the NMA the declaration that Mr. Nnamdi Kanu, currently standing trial in Abuja, has been found fit to stand trial and that his illness is not life-threatening.

“While it is understandable that the courts may, from time to time, request professional medical input in cases where an accused person’s fitness to stand trial is in question, I must respectfully request clarification from the National Secretariat on what constitutional or statutory basis the NMA as a corporate body performs such a function.

“To the best of my knowledge, and according to the NMA Constitution and By-Laws available to members, our Association’s functions are primarily professional, ethical, and advocacy-based.

“Nowhere, as far as I can ascertain, is there any provision empowering the Association itself as opposed to independent medical experts or panels appointed by the court  to declare a defendant fit or unfit to stand trial.

“Traditionally, and in line with standard medico-legal practice, the process has always been as follows: When a person’s fitness to stand trial is in question, the court appoints qualified medical experts, often forensic psychiatrists or a multidisciplinary medical board, to assess the individual’s physical and mental condition.

“The panel reports to the court, which then makes the legal determination of fitness to stand trial.

“The NMA, as a professional body, does not issue such declarations in its institutional capacity unless the Association is merely acting as an administrative conduit to nominate experts — in which case, it should be clearly stated that the declaration emanates from individual medical practitioners and not the NMA itself.

“Given this distinction, I, along with many colleagues, seek your kind clarification on the following points: Under what article or section of the NMA Constitution or By-Laws does the Association have the authority to constitute or endorse a medical panel for determining a person’s fitness to stand trial?

“Was the panel that examined Mr. Nnamdi Kanu constituted as a court-appointed body through the NMA, or was it presented publicly as an NMA-declared verdict?

“If the latter, how does this align with the professional and ethical boundaries of our Association as defined by its constitution?

“Sir, as you would agree, clarity on this matter is necessary not only to uphold the integrity and independence of our profession, but also to ensure that the public correctly understands the role of the NMA in sensitive medico-legal proceedings.

“I therefore humbly urge the National Secretariat to issue an official clarification, citing the specific constitutional or statutory framework that underpinned the Association’s involvement in this particular case.”