The Convict and the Captive: Nigeria’s Diplomatic Farce in Two Acts -By Vitus Ozoke, PhD

There are moments in a nation’s history that reveal not only the weakness of its leadership but also the emptiness of its moral compass. The recent diplomatic mission by Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s ministers to the United Kingdom to discuss the imprisonment of former Deputy Senate President Ike Ekweremadu is one such moment – and a profoundly shameful one. Nothing demonstrates the Nigerian government’s lack of seriousness and maturity more clearly than this desperate attempt to intervene in a case where justice has already been done.

Let’s review the basics. Senator Ike Ekweremadu, his wife, and a doctor were convicted in a British court for the heinous act of conspiring to traffic a young man from Nigeria to the UK to harvest his kidney. It was a transaction born of premeditation, power imbalance, and corruption. This is not politics; it is crime – a crime under the UK’s Modern Slavery Act. The court found Ekweremadu guilty after a transparent, public trial. The evidence was clear, the process was fair, and the sentence – nine years and eight months – reflected the seriousness of the offense.

The judge described the Ekweremadus’ conduct as “a form of slavery … treating human beings, and their body parts, as commodities to be bought and sold.” The case was historic precisely because it showed that even powerful and influential political figures could be held accountable under the law. There is nothing unjust about Ekweremadu’s detention. He is serving his fully earned sentence. He did the crime, and he is doing the time. Justice was served – and seen to be served. No one seriously objects that Ekweremadu is in a British prison for a crime proven by a British court. The justice system worked.

But Bola Tinubu and Nigeria’s hypocrisy are boundless. While he sends envoys to the UK to plea for Ekweremadu’s release, what is Bola Tinubu doing about a far more egregious outrage: the case of Mazi Nnamdi Kanu, a British citizen, whose case has been documented by domestic and international organizations as involving extraordinary rendition and arbitrary detention? Nnamdi Kanu, a British citizen, was illegally kidnapped and renditioned to Nigeria in 2021 – a blatant act that broke all international conventions on extradition and legal rights. Since then, Nigerian courts have repeatedly ordered his unconditional release. Yet, the Nigerian government – the same one now asking the British government to free Ike Ekweremadu, a duly convicted politician – continues to hold Kanu in opposition to its own courts. You can’t make this up!

At the risk of sounding repetitive – a risk worth taking – let me clarify this for emphasis. Kanu was abducted in Kenya and transferred to Nigeria without proper extradition, in an operation the United Nations Human Rights Council’s Working Group on Arbitrary Detention describes as a forced disappearance, also known as extraordinary rendition. Nigerian courts, including appellate courts, have declared the rendition illegal. However, Kanu remains detained under conditions that raise serious concerns about the fairness of the trial, due process, health, and legal access.

So, let’s get this straight: Nigeria illegally abducts and detains a British citizen who has not been convicted of any crime. Meanwhile, Nigeria goes to London with hat in hand, asking the UK to release a Nigerian citizen who has been properly convicted of a serious offense. The moral baton is passed to the UK, which is encouraged to do better by releasing a Nigerian convict, while Nigeria is guilty of much deeper domestic and international violations, holding an innocent British man captive. What a display of moral hypocrisy. What a farcical diplomatic performance. Who are these people! If hypocrisy and irony were sports, Nigeria would be the world champions.

How does one even start to explain this diplomatic absurdity? The Tinubu administration sends the Foreign Affairs Minister and the Attorney General and Minister for Justice – the top diplomatic and legal officials of the country – to plead for mercy for a man who was found guilty of exploiting a poor Nigerian youth. Meanwhile, the same government tramples on the rights of a British citizen it unlawfully rendered from Kenya. The hypocrisy is staggering. The message to the world is clear: Nigeria will go to any length to corruptly protect its political elites, but it will violate every known law, including international law, and defy morality when it comes to the powerless, especially when it is politically convenient.

Look, it doesn’t take a genius to see what’s really going on here. Ekweremadu’s son is a commissioner in Enugu State, working under Governor Peter Mbah, who has conveniently joined the ruling APC. So, is this “diplomatic effort” really about justice, or is it about political favoritism and party solidarity? Is this not political cronyism masquerading as diplomacy? Is this what it means to “join the winning team” – so that your convicted relatives abroad suddenly become causes célèbres worth official governmental intervention? If so, then that is not diplomacy. That is a walking and breathing corruption wearing a consular badge and carrying a diplomatic passport.

A serious country upholds the rule of law both at home and abroad. Nigeria, unfortunately, has turned this principle on its head. When a powerful politician is convicted overseas, we cry foul and plead for mercy. But when a dissenter is illegally detained domestically, we ignore the courts and mock the law. This is not governance – it’s a complete sham. It’s a theatre performed at the expense of the nation’s dignity. This is a shitshow. And you wonder why they call us a shithole and no serious country takes us seriously. Who will take this current parade of Nigerian leadership seriously? Clearly, Donald Trump doesn’t.

Honestly, and I say this as a proud and patriotic Nigerian, the UK shouldn’t take Nigeria’s request seriously – and it probably won’t. No responsible country will set a convict free just because a government notorious for breaking its own laws asks for it. Nigeria has no moral right to make such a request. Until it releases Nnamdi Kanu, follows the orders of its own courts, and stops the culture of impunity and selective justice, Nigeria has no business preaching fairness to anyone, least of all to a country where the rule of law actually functions as designed.

Why does this matter? First, credibility. When you ask another country to do you a favor—such as releasing your citizen—while you refuse to fix your own problems like illegal rendition and detention of that country’s national, you lose credibility. Second, the rule of law. Convicting Ekweremadu in the UK highlighted that even powerful figures can be held accountable. That is commendable. But Nigeria’s refusal to acknowledge Kanu’s abuse weakens its own claimed commitment to human rights and fair treatment. Third, diplomacy and reciprocity. Diplomacy is grounded in reciprocity, coherence, and moral standing. Nigeria’s cooperation with the UK in this context simply amplifies the question: Who watches the watchers? And fourth, the message to Nigerians at home. It sends a message that it’s acceptable for politicians to commit serious crimes abroad and then ask for intervention. It suggests the state can bypass international law when it benefits them. Let’s call it what it really is – corruption. Plain and simple.

Regardless of the nuances of diplomatic protocol, the Tinubu government owes Nigeria a full account. Why is Nigeria prioritizing Ekweremadu’s release when a citizen of the partner country (Britain) is held unlawfully under Nigeria’s watch? What does this say about Nigeria’s respect for international law when it engages in clandestine rendition? Why does the government treat the suffering of one citizen as worthy of active diplomacy but seem indifferent when another citizen’s plight implicates the same state? How can Nigeria demand moral consistency from another country while blatantly violating it both internally and externally?

This is not just irony – it is a matter of national self-humiliation. The Nigerian government appears unserious, incompetent, and morally bankrupt on the international stage. This shameful display is more than a diplomatic blunder; it is a mirror held up to our face. It reveals a government that prioritizes privilege over principle, connections over justice, and optics over substance. Yes, it is possible to hold both positions simultaneously: that Ekweremadu did wrong and should serve time, and that Nigeria’s government has committed or allowed far worse violations regarding its own responsibilities. The two issues are not mutually exclusive – they reflect the gap between law and power in Nigeria, between rhetoric and reality, between the public façade and the private deals.

The decision to send ministers to London to press for Ekweremadu’s release is not just tactically misguided – it is symbolic of an administration that lacks self-respect, strategic coherence, and moral backbone. It sends a message: “We will seek external leniency for our elites abroad, even as we ignore the rule of law at home.” That is not diplomacy. That is spectacle. If Bola Tinubu wants to be taken seriously by the international community, he should stop embarrassing Nigeria abroad and start respecting the rule of law at home.

Bola Tinubu should face the straightforward question: why should the UK or any country take seriously a state that detains a British citizen illegally but asks for freedom for its own citizen who was legally convicted in the UK? Until Nigeria stops embarrassing itself this way, it damages not only its foreign policy but also the dignity of its people. Until then, we will remain a country that kidnaps innocent people and pleads for the guilty – a country that has lost both its moral voice and political dignity. If Nigeria is going to engage the international community with any credence, it must start by fixing its own house rather than beseeching others to do the same. And I hope to God this UK debacle was not calculated as a strategic diversion from last week’s shellacking from Donald Trump and the US. Because if it were, then we would have humiliated ourselves on both sides of the pond.

Dr. Vitus Ozoke is a lawyer, human rights activist, and public affairs analyst based in the United States. He writes on politics, governance, and the moral costs of leadership failure in Africa.