The family of the leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Nnamdi Kanu, has officially rejected his conviction by an Abuja Federal High Court.
Kanu was convicted of terrorism charges and sentenced to life imprisonment by Justice James Omotosho on September 20, 2025, and is serving his term at the Sokoto Correctional Centre.
The Okwu Kanu family, in a Monday statement by Prince Emmanuel Kanu, called the judgment a judicial ambush, a denial of fair hearing, and an affront to the Constitution. The family stated that Justice Omotosho ignored constitutional commands and Supreme Court authorities, including Section 36(12) of the Constitution, and convicted Kanu on repealed and non-existent laws.
They condemned the conviction as unprecedented and unconstitutional, citing a direct violation of the right to fair hearing. The statement asserts that the judge illegally introduced a transition/savings clause on judgment day, after arguments concluded, without informing the accused, which defined a denial of fair hearing and “ambush jurisprudence.”
The family emphasized that the Supreme Court has repeatedly affirmed that a repealed law is dead and cannot sustain a conviction, yet Justice Omotosho violated these authorities, contradicting the Constitution and his oath. They further argued that the judge’s use of the savings clause was legally impossible because the clause only applies to pending matters, and Kanu’s case was terminated when the Court of Appeal discharged and acquitted him, meaning the subsequent fresh charges were a new case, which the clause cannot save.
The statement concluded that the right to fair hearing, which includes not being convicted under a repealed law, is a non-derogable right under Section 36 of the Constitution. The family stated that Justice Omotosho’s judgment is unlawful, unconstitutional, and void, achieved through ambush, reliance on dead laws, and disobedience to the Supreme Court. They demand the immediate nullification of the unconstitutional conviction and an end to the judicial improvisation.
The information is based on the family’s statement. Would you like me to search for any news regarding the appeal process initiated by Nnamdi Kanu’s legal team following this conviction?
The family of the leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Nnamdi Kanu, has issued an official statement rejecting his conviction by an Abuja Federal High Court. Kanu was convicted of terrorism charges and sentenced to life imprisonment by Justice James Omotosho on September 20, 2025, and is serving his term at the Sokoto Correctional Centre. The Okwu Kanu family, in a Monday statement by Prince Emmanuel Kanu, described the judgment as a judicial ambush, a complete denial of fair hearing, and an affront to the Constitution. The family stated that Justice Omotosho ignored constitutional commands and Supreme Court authorities, including Section 36(12) of the Constitution, and convicted Kanu on repealed and non-existent laws. They condemned the conviction as unprecedented and unconstitutional, citing a direct violation of the right to fair hearing. The statement asserts that the judge illegally introduced a transition/savings clause on judgment day, after arguments concluded, without informing the accused, which the family called the very definition of denial of fair hearing and “ambush jurisprudence.” The family emphasized that the Supreme Court has repeatedly affirmed that a repealed law is dead and cannot sustain a conviction, yet Justice Omotosho violated these authorities, contradicting the Constitution and his oath. They further argued that the judge’s use of the savings clause was legally impossible because the clause only applies to pending matters, and Kanu’s case was terminated when the Court of Appeal discharged and acquitted him, meaning the subsequent fresh charges were a new case that the clause cannot save. The statement concluded that the right to fair hearing, which includes not being convicted under a repealed law, is a non-derogable right under Section 36 of the Constitution. The family stated that Justice Omotosho’s judgment is unlawful, unconstitutional, and void, achieved through ambush, reliance on dead laws, and disobedience to the Supreme Court. They demand the immediate nullification of the unconstitutional conviction and an end to the judicial improvisation.
Reports indicate that Kanu’s lawyers vowed to appeal the life sentence, and he had even filed an appeal before the Court of Appeal seeking to stop the judgment delivery. Separately, Abia State Governor, Alex Otti, has appealed for calm, stating that the conviction is not the end of the road and assuring the public that he has “activated and will continue to work on the already agreed strategy” for Kanu’s release through alternative political resolution with the Federal Government.
Would you like me to find the specific legal grounds of the formal appeal filed by Kanu’s legal team following the conviction?
About The Author
