Kanu gets life imprisonment after 10-year trial

A Federal High Court in Abuja, yesterday, sentenced the leader of the proscribed Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Nnamdi Kanu, to life imprisonment for terrorism and ordered his remand in protective custody. Justice James Omotosho, who convicted Kanu on all counts, however, noted that, as a Christian, he chose to be merciful and reduced the […]

A Federal High Court in Abuja, yesterday, sentenced the leader of the proscribed Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Nnamdi Kanu, to life imprisonment for terrorism and ordered his remand in protective custody.

Justice James Omotosho, who convicted Kanu on all counts, however, noted that, as a Christian, he chose to be merciful and reduced the sentence to a life term, rather than the death sentence provided by the law.

While the judge reduced the highest sentence under counts one, two, four, five and six of the seven-count charge, he sentenced Kanu to 20 years imprisonment without the option of fine on count three. The court also imposed five years jail term on Kanu for the unlawful importation of a radio transmitter.

The judge ordered that the defendant be kept in a protective custody in any part of the country, but not in Kuje prison, Abuja, and that the radio transmitter be forfeited to the federal government.

• Health workers’ strike increases patronage of private hospitals
• DSS files terrorism charges against IPOB commanders linked to Simon Ekpa

Earlier in the day, the judge sent Kanu out of the court for “unruly behaviour” after dismissing three fresh motions he filed after the case was adjourned for judgment.

Kanu, who had in October sacked his senior lawyers Kanu Agabi, Onyechi Ikpeazu and Paul Erokoro, to enable him defend himself, had on November 12, filed three motions contending that the High Court lacked the jurisdiction to entertain the case on the grounds that the Supreme Court held that he was unlawfully renditioned from Kenya to Nigeria; that he was charged on a repealed Terrorism Prevention Act of 2013, and that he should be granted bail.

The judge ruled that Kanu deliberately failed to present any evidence against allegations against him, which meant that he chose to rest his case on that of the prosecution which was deemed unchallenged.

On the issue of lack of fair hearing, the court said Kanu got all opportunities for defence, but chose to file a no case submission which was refused, and the Nigerian Medical Association (NMA) was directed to ascertain his fitness to face trial, which brought the report that he was fit to do so.

“The court had careful observed the defendant during the trial, his fitness, unruly attitude and his agility in defending himself, and it showed without doubt that he is indeed fit to stand trial,” he said.

On the issue of extraordinary rendition, the court ruled that the Supreme Court had ruled that the procedure for his production in court did not rub the High Court of the jurisdiction to conduct the trial on the charge before it.

The judge said since his charge was filed before he jumped bail, “His escape and appearance in Kenya make him a fugitive.”

The judge also observed that during the #EndSARS protest, Kanu made a broadcast which contributed to the destruction of lives and properties in different parts of the country, including the killing of former presidential aide, Ahmed Gulak.

The judge noted that during the protest, Kanu also called for attack on the British High Commission in Abuja, consulate in Lagos and the High Commissioner, Catriona Liang.

He said Kanu was an “international terrorist” as his action would have breached Article 22 of the Vienna Convention on the inviolability of foreign missions in any country.

Following the conviction, prosecution counsel, Adegboyega Awomolo (SAN) asked the court to impose the stiffest death penalty provided in three of the seven-count charges because there was no room for the court’s discretion on them.

He further requested that Kanu’s digital media devices and accounts be closed, forfeited, or confiscated by the court to prevent him from committing more offences before the execution of the sentence. 

Furthermore, he submitted that the court should “direct for the safety and security of the defendant, to be kept in the safest custodial centre anywhere in Nigeria until the execution of the sentence.” 

He noted that Kanu is a divisive figure with too many friends and enemies – who may want to eliminate him if given the opportunity. 

In his allocutus (plea for mercy), Obi Aguocha, a lawmaker representing Kanu’s constituency, asked the court to consider the restoration of peace and the need to tackle the terrorism bedevilling the country in awarding the sentence. 

Speaking after the judgement, the lead prosecutor, Awomolo, said the court has brought an end to “oppression and injustice to the eastern states of Nigeria as the people will now be able to sleep with their two eyes closed”.

“Every Nigerian must consider insecurity as a serious business as Nigeria is our country; we have no other country we can call our own,” he said.

However, the consultant to Kanu, Aloy Ejimakor Esq, vowed to appeal the judgement.

“Today will forever live in infamy; Today is the only day where a man was convicted for mere puffery; for what he said with his mouth, not what he did with own hands.

“The verdict is not consistent with the evidence led before the court. The sentence is overboard, cruel and unusual.

“How can you convict a man for making mere broadcast from a location that was never named, and they never tied that broadcast to any incidence of violence or even someone slapping someone, not to talk of terrorism?” he queried.

During the judgment, Daily Trust gathered that there were security personnel around the home of Kanu in Afara-Ukwu Ibeku, Umuahia, Abia State, to prevent a breakdown of law and order. 

 

The charge

The Department of State Security Service (DSS) had brought the fresh 15-count charge against Kanu in 2015, which was later reduced to seven-count by the court in 2021, with five witnesses and several exhibits recovered from Kanu in a Lagos hotel such as phones, laptops, perfumes, ATM cards, including the Biafra radio equipment. 

In the fresh charge, the prosecution stated in count 1, that in 2021, Kanu committed acts of terrorism by making a broadcast to intimidate the people of Nigeria by stating that “people will die and the whole world will stand” contrary to Section 1(2)(b) of the Terrorism Prevention Act, 2011.

The DSS further stated in count 2, that sometimes in 2021 Kanu released a deadly threat that anyone who flouts the sit-at-home should write his or her will which caused banks, schools, markets, fuel stations stationed in the eastern states of Nigeria not to open for business, while citizens and vehicular movements were grounded, which breached Section 2(b) of the Terrorism Prevention Act, 2011.

In count 3, the DSS alleged that between 2018 and 2021, Kanu professed himself to be a member and leader of IPOB, a proscribed organisation, contrary to Section16 of the Terrorism Prevention Act 2013.

In count 4 and 5, between 2018 and 2021, Kanu made a broadcast heard and received in Nigeria to kill Nigeria’s security personnel and their family members, which breached Section 1(2)(8) of the Terrorism Prevention Act, 2013.  

In count 6, Kanu was alleged to have between 2018 and 2021 made a broadcast where he directed members of the IPOB, a proscribed organisation to manufacture bombs which breached Section 1(2)(f) of the Terrorism Prevention Act, 2013.

In count 7, Kanu was accused of importing a container housing a radio transmitter known as TRAM 50L, which he kept at Ubuluisiuzor in Ihiala Local Government Area of Anambra State for the Radio Biafra which breached Section 47(2)(a) of the Criminal Code.

The DSS alleged that Kanu’s orders led to the burning down of several government buildings, killing of innocent citizens including over 170 security personnel.

 

Kanu’s family, Abaribe, others react

The family of the IPOB leader rejected the judgment of the court, saying it was “a political judgment without any legal foundation.”

Speaking to Daily Trust shortly after the verdict, Prince Emmanuel Kanu, younger brother of the IPOB leader, said the entire trial lacked credible evidence and accused the presiding judge of relying on allegations that were never tendered before the court.

He said, “Throughout the presentation in court, there was no single evidence against Mazi Nnamdi Kanu. Yet, we were shocked to hear the judge mention things that were never in the case file. He even claimed my brother attempted to bomb the American and British embassies — something that never came up in court.”

Prince Emmanuel said such pronouncements represent “an embarrassment to the dignity of Nigeria’s judiciary,” insisting that the seven-count charge on which the IPOB leader was convicted was not backed by any valid or written law.

He stated that Kanu repeatedly demanded to know the law under which he was being tried, a question he said the court failed to answer.

“How do you proceed to judgment when an accused person asks under which law he is being charged, and there is no answer? By the constitution, he has a right to give an allocutus before sentencing, but Justice Omotosho denied him even that,” he said.

He argued that several incidents linked to Kanu in the judgement – including the EndSARS protest and the killing of Ahmed Gulak – had been publicly debunked or shown to have no connection to the IPOB leader.

“Even the governor of Imo State has publicly said Gulak was killed by his political enemies. So why attach that to Kanu? Why capitalise on things that never appeared in evidence?” he queried.

He also dismissed claims linking Kanu to sit-at-home orders, noting that on the day Gulak was killed, “a Sunday, not even a sit-at-home day,” further proves the inconsistencies in the allegations.

He maintained that “no one has ever come forward to say Nnamdi Kanu incited them to violence,” insisting that the continued detention of the IPOB leader is unlawful.

Also reacting to the judgment through a statement in Abuja by his Media Adviser, Uchenna Awom, Senator Enyinnaya Abaribe said the life jail handed down to Kanu was a preconceived plot that is not surprising to the Igbo nation and other “right-thinking Nigerians”.

Abaribe said at the time the federal government refused to factor in pleadings to extend the amnesty to Nnamdi Kanu as done to some others, “we knew that today’s outcome was imminent.”

“Is it not an irony that negotiations and peace deals with rampaging terrorists in the North East, North West were gleefully initiated by the local government, states and federal government just like the amnesty to ex-militants in the South South, who were rewarded with lucrative oil pipeline contracts? This is to say that justice in Nigeria is not for the South East.

“So, we are not surprised, our people can only endure and hope for a time justice in Nigeria would become the sine qua non. We have done our best, we have variously made the case for the authorities to be circumspect and at least accede to pardon for the sake of unity and inclusiveness,” Abaribe said.

The spokesman of Ohanaeze Ndigbo, Ezichi Chukwu, when contacted, told Daily Trust that the organization will speak when it takes a position on the matter.

 

Not end of the road, say Middle-Belt Forum, South East group

The President of the Middle-Belt Forum, Dr Bitrus Pogu said, “My view actually is that the judgment would be appealed by his lawyers and I believe his case in the long run would be politically resolved. I don’t believe it would end with a judicial process.

“There are many freedom fighters in history who were jailed and eventually their jail terms were quashed through political processes and they were released. One example is Nelson Mandela, who in spite of the entire struggle, he was released and he even became president. So, I believe Kanu’s case will eventually be determined politically,” he said. 

The South East Group, on its part, rejected Kanu’s conviction and described the ruling as a judicial aberration, a constitutional violation, and a deliberate assault on the principles of fair hearing, natural justice, and due process.

In a statement issued in Abuja and signed by its National Director of Publicity, Evang. Nnaemeka Aleke, the group said the judgment represented a mockery of Nigeria’s jurisprudence.

Meanwhile, reactions from the South East have continued to trail the judgment. According to the Vanguard newspaper, people were seen at several points in Owerri municipality of Imo State, discussing the issue in low tones and only a few of them opted to speak on the matter.

Chief Simeon Odike said he was not surprised by the judgment because “I didn’t expect anything less. Have we not lost count of the judgments in favour of Mazi Nnamdi Kanu? Was any of the judgments obeyed?

“Prominent Igbo sons, daughters, clerics and most recently, no fewer than 44 members of the National Assembly, from different parts of the country, called on President Bola Ahmed Tinubu, to graciously release Mazi Nnamdi Kanu.

“It is sad that this didn’t work. Let’s wait and see what happens next,” he said.

Speaking also, Mr Luke Okechukwu said, “I am saddened by the judgment of the Federal High Court. The mood of the people amply exhibits the inner feelings of the populace.

“There could have been a subtle, pleasurable, political solution to this case, instead of relying fully on our judicial system.

“It is sad that those in the corridors of power didn’t want to exploit it. I am aware that the court can give justice but definitely, not peace, because they are two different things.”

In her contribution, Mrs Adaora Okoro, said “The life imprisonment pronounced by this judge did not shock anybody who has been following the case to date.

“I see it as working from the answer to the question. It is most interesting that the court session was streamed live by major national television stations.”

In Abuja, human rights activist, Omoyele Sowore, accused the federal government of executing a predetermined “political script” in the conviction of IPOB leader, Mazi Nnamdi Kanu.

In a post on his X handle on Thursday, Sowore said he had warned as far back as November 5, 2025, that the outcome of Kanu’s trial had been sealed.

In a statement, the Igbo Community Association in the FCT said the judgment does not speak well of the President  Tinubu administration.

The President General, Ikenna Ellis-Ezenekwe, said the “conviction is not in line with the spirit of brotherliness “that was extended to the Boko Haram combatants and to other combatants around the country.”

 

Kanu can appeal – Lawyers

Meanwhile, lawyers have explained that the defendant can appeal the judgment if he is not satisfied with the outcome.

Reacting, Professor Abdullahi Shehu Zuru, stated that the decision to appeal was a matter of the opinion of the legal team, adding that the court can indeed proceed without the defendant in court, especially when adjudged to be disruptive.

Also reacting, Adedayo Adedeji (SAN) said the court’s action of sending the defendant out of the court room before delivering judgment was well-guided by the law.

“He has a right of appeal, as the Federal High Court is not the final court, since the conviction has happened, he has the right to appeal,” he said.

He said there are criteria to present fresh evidence on appeal, if he chooses to do so.

Jibrin S. Jibrin Esq said a judgment can be delivered in the absence of the defendant under certain circumstances, especially if a miscarriage of justice will not be occasioned by his absence and there is a good reason for that, adding that Kanu can appeal the verdict.

Similarly, Nkem Okoro Esq said the defendant bungled his case by opting to defend himself.

“He did not help his case at all, the lessons to be learnt from the entire trial or story of Nnamdi Kalu is that our conducts must align with the law, no matter how aggrieved we are,” he said.

 

Timeline of major IPOB attacks (2015–2025)

2015–2017: Violent clashes in Aba, Onitsha, and Port Harcourt after Kanu’s arrest. Police stations and checkpoints attacked.

2018–2020: Sporadic assaults on police posts; targeted killings of politicians and traditional rulers.

2021: Sit‑at‑home order declared; enforcement led to widespread killings and arson.

2022: INEC offices, police stations, and government buildings attacked in Imo and Anambra.

2023: Continued enforcement disrupted commerce; arson against markets and transport operators.

2024: IPOB’s international wing signed a declaration in Finland accusing Nigeria of “genocide.” Violence persisted with assassinations and destruction of property.

2025: Over 700 deaths recorded; Imo and Anambra identified as worst hit, according to reports.

 

Kanu’s broadcasts and posts 

2015–2017: On Radio Biafra, Kanu described Nigeria as a “zoo” and declared that “the only language people in the zoo understand is violence.”

2020 (EndSARS): Kanu urged attacks on police officers and their families via social media.

2021: He declared weekly sit‑at‑home protests; broadcasts included explicit calls for the killing of security personnel.

2022–2023: Continued online posts encouraged violent enforcement of sit‑at‑home orders.