The convicted leader of proscribed Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Nnamdi Kanu, has formally challenged his conviction and sentencing, filing a notice of appeal that contends his trial was marred by fundamental legal breaches and amounted to a miscarriage of justice.
In the appeal filed on February 4, 2026, at the Court of Appeal in Abuja, Kanu seeks to overturn the judgment delivered by Justice James Omotosho of the Federal High Court on November 20, 2025. In that ruling, Kanu was found guilty on seven counts of terrorism-related offences and sentenced to five life terms plus additional prison sentences.
Central to Kanu’s appeal are several substantive legal objections. He argues that his trial proceeded on a flawed foundation due to what he terms a “foundational disruption” caused by the 2017 military invasion of his home in Afara-Ukwu, Umuahia. According to his filing, this event fundamentally compromised the original trial process, an issue the lower court failed to properly resolve.
Kanu’s grounds of appeal further allege that Justice Omotosho’s court delivered its judgment while two critical defence motions were still pending: a preliminary objection challenging the court’s jurisdiction and a bail application. He asserts that proceeding to judgment under these circumstances violated his right to a fair hearing.
A significant pillar of his appeal challenges the legal basis of the conviction itself. Kanu contends that he was tried and sentenced under the Terrorism Prevention (Amendment) Act of 2013, which had already been repealed and replaced by the Terrorism (Prevention and Prohibition) Act of 2022 before the judgment was delivered. Arguing that conviction under a repealed statute is a nullity, he frames this as a critical error of law.
The IPOB leader also raises the constitutional principle of double jeopardy, citing Section 36(9) of the 1999 Constitution. He claims the charges for which he was convicted had previously been nullified by a Court of Appeal ruling, making his retrial on the same facts unconstitutional.
Furthermore, Kanu alleges he was denied the right to present a final written address before the judgment was issued, which he says further eroded the fairness of the proceedings.
In his sought reliefs, Kanu urges the appellate court to allow the appeal, quash his conviction and sentences, and enter a verdict of discharge and acquittal on all counts. Notably, the notice of appeal includes his request to be physically present at the hearing, stating, “I want to be present at the hearing of the appeal because I may be conducting the appeal in person.”
Kanu is currently held at a correctional facility in Sokoto State, following the denial of an earlier application to be transferred to another detention centre. The appeal sets the stage for a significant legal contest over the procedures and statutes applied in one of Nigeria’s most high-profile terrorism trials.
Discussion about this post