Kashamu claimed that there was a pending case in the US court in which he is challenging his indictment for the said offences based on these and the judgment of the High Court in England over same issue, Justice Okeke had ruled that pursuit to extradite Kashamu was tainted with unfairness and bad fate. 

The Attorney general of the federation later appealed the judgment on grounds that there was no reasonable cause of action. According to the AGF, there was neither any request for extradition of Kashamu by the US authorities, nor was the Nigerian Government conceiving plans to surrender Him.

The AGF also challenged the mode by which Kashamu instituted the case. He argued that the issue being quiet contentious should have been commenced via writ of summons and not originating summons. The court of appeal agreed with the attorney general of the federation’s argument holding that Kashamu’s allegation that there were plans to surrender him to the US authorities based on pressure by his political opponents were speculative and mere hearsay. The court further held that it would amount to sheer travesty of justice for a court to predicate its decision on speculation.

Based on this, it set aside justice okeke’s judgment. Dissatisfied Kashamu not only appealed to the Supreme Court but also asked the court throw a motion to set aside its judgment alleging bias on the path of the presiding Justice, Amina Ogi whom He said had influenced the panel. That too was dismissed with the court of appeal noting that the proceedings were conducted validly and its judgment legitimate