The Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) is demanding that Justice James Omotosho of the Abuja Federal High Court clarify the specific law used to convict its leader, Nnamdi Kanu, on terrorism charges, leading to a life sentence.
IPOB, through spokesman Emma Powerful, reiterated the argument by Kanu’s defense that the Terrorism Prevention Amendment Act 2013, under which he was charged, had been nullified by the 2022 Act.
The group claims that Kanu was never found with weapons or attack plans, and no witness testified that he committed any illegal offense. They assert his only “offence” is the internationally recognized right to self-determination, arguing that agitation and requesting a referendum are not terrorism.
IPOB pointed out that insecurity in the South-East worsened while Kanu was in solitary confinement, making his involvement physically impossible. The statement also reminded the world that the Nigerian military attacked Kanu and massacred IPOB members, yet the victims are now being convicted.
IPOB declared the judgment a “legal impossibility” under Section 36(12) of the Constitution, which requires a defined and penalized offense in a written law. They challenged Justice Omotosho to state the extant written law he relied on, especially given the alleged repeal, and accused him of ignoring court precedents against using repealed statutes.
IPOB vowed to publicly dissect and expose the ruling, calling it a “judicial malpractice”. They emphasized that Kanu’s case is a human rights, constitutional, and international law issue, viewing him as a prisoner of conscience and a victim of political persecution.
About The Author
