Nnamdi Kanu: Court Convicts IPOB Leader On Seven-Count Terrorism Charge

Few legal battles in Nigeria have captured national and international attention as intensely as the trial of Nnamdi Kanu, the leader of the proscribed Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB). For nearly a decade, his name has hovered over conversations about secession, human rights, national unity, and the limits of state power. But today, after years of twists, legal maneuvers, arrests, escapes, and unprecedented courtroom clashes, the controversial figure is set to finally learn his fate.

And what unfolded in court today was nothing short of dramatic, sometimes shocking, sometimes chaotic, and always politically charged. Kanu’s legal troubles date back to 2015, when he was first arrested and charged with treasonable felony and terrorism. As his supporters grew louder, so did the government’s determination to prosecute him. But the case spiraled into something much larger than a simple criminal trial.

In 2017, while out on bail, Kanu fled Nigeria after a military operation at his home during Operation Python Dance in the South-East. Then in June 2021, he was rearrested in Kenya under highly controversial circumstances, what his legal team has consistently described as an extraordinary rendition, a move that sparked international debate about legal and diplomatic boundaries. Upon his return to Nigeria, the charges against him ballooned to 15 counts, including terrorism, incitement, and threats of violence. But despite the seriousness of the charges, the trial soon became entangled in procedural challenges, motions, counter-motions, and questions about jurisdiction.

Representing the Federal Government is Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN) Adegboyega Awomolo, while Kanu, defiant and often confrontational, chose to represent himself. The courtroom scenes today felt like a movie unfolding in real time. The presiding judge, Justice Omotosho, struggled repeatedly to maintain order as Kanu clashed with the bench, disrupted proceedings, refused to sit, and insisted on filing additional motions that had not been scheduled for hearing.

Here’s how the drama unfolded:

9:00am – 10:00am

Before reading the judgment, the judge urged Kanu to comport himself, citing his constitutional right to be present at his own trial. But as has happened in prior sittings, Kanu refused to comply.

He insisted on addressing the court, asking why he should remain detained over charges he claimed “do not exist” and asserting that the charge sheet itself violated constitutional standards. He demanded bail, cited motions he filed independently, and argued that superior courts had already decided related matters. The judge repeatedly warned him, at a point ordering DSS operatives to remove him from the courtroom when he refused to release the microphone.

The Judgment: A Complete Conviction

By 10:14am, Justice Omotosho decided that the judgment would be delivered in Kanu’s absence, citing his unruly conduct. What followed was a step-by-step breakdown of all charges, most of which resulted in convictions.

Key Grounds for the Conviction

Between 1:00pm and 2:20pm, count after count fell against Kanu:

Count One: Threatening broadcasts declaring that people would die and the world would stand still.
The judge said Kanu showed no remorse, adding that evidence proved he carried out preparatory acts of terrorism.
Count Two: Declared acts of violence and intimidation in the South-East.
His sit-at-home orders were classified as terrorism.
Counts Three to Seven:
These allegations ranged from threats against diplomatic missions to ordering attacks abroad.

At one point, the judge cited a broadcast where Kanu allegedly called for the destruction of the U.S. Embassy. In another, he noted plans to bomb the British High Commission and harm former British High Commissioner Catriona Laing. These, Justice Omotosho said, elevated Kanu to the status of an “international terrorist.”

One of the most striking parts of the judgment was the judge’s interpretation of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights. While the Charter grants the right to self-determination, the judge ruled it is subordinate to Nigeria’s Constitution, which recognizes the country as an indivisible and indissoluble sovereign state. According to him, self-determination, if genuinely desired, must be pursued legally by seeking a constitutional amendment through the National Assembly, not by agitation, broadcasts, or actions he described as “terrorism.”

The Prosecutor Pushes for the Ultimate Punishment

At 2:32pm, Awomolo SAN shocked the courtroom by asking for the death sentence.

He argued:

75 security officers were killed in incidents linked to Kanu’s directives
Terrorism is “a great threat to humanity”
Kanu has shown “arrogance, not remorse”
His safety must be guaranteed, suggesting he should not be kept in Kuje Prison due to past jailbreaks

His words underscored the weight the government placed on this case and the symbolic importance of its outcome.

When the judge noted that Kanu’s absence was habitual and disruptive, he called on his consultant lawyer, Alloy Ejimakor, who declined to speak and instead passed the responsibility to Hon. Obi Aguocha, Kanu’s representative in the House of Representatives. This unusual intervention highlighted the political and social dimensions the case has taken on.

As the court reconvenes for sentencing at 3:50pm, Nigeria holds its breath. Regardless of the sentence, this verdict is bound to ignite intense reactions:

Supporters will claim political persecution
Critics will insist this proves Nigeria’s sovereignty must remain intact
Analysts will debate what this means for the future of the South-East
International observers will scrutinize the legal process

One thing is certain:
The judgment on Nnamdi Kanu is not just about one man. It is a defining moment in Nigeria’s ongoing struggle to balance national unity, security, justice, and freedom of expression.

And today, finally, after almost a decade of courtroom battles, Nigeria moves one step closer to closure.

READ MORE