In a fiery and immediate rejection of the ruling, Nnamdi Kanu’s lead counsel, Barrister Aloy Ejimakor, has condemned the Federal High Court judgment sentencing the IPOB leader to life imprisonment, describing it as “a conviction based on mere words, politics, and ethnic bias.” Ejimakor insisted that the verdict “will live in infamy” and vowed it would be overturned on appeal.
The outburst followed a dramatic conclusion to a case that has gripped the nation for years. On Thursday, Justice James Omotosho of the Federal High Court, Abuja, convicted Kanu on three terrorism-related charges and sentenced him to life imprisonment. The decision comes four years after Kanu’s controversial arrest in Kenya and his return to Nigeria in what his legal team has consistently described as an illegal extraordinary rendition.
Kanu, who faced a seven-count terrorism charge filed by the Department of State Services (DSS), was not present in court during the sentencing. He had maintained that the court lacked the jurisdiction to proceed against him on the terrorism allegations.
Justice Omotosho ruled that Kanu’s online broadcasts — including sit-at-home directives in the South-East and alleged threats of violence — amounted to acts of terrorism. The judge also held that the IPOB leader, in one of his broadcasts, admitted to being a member of a group that the Federal High Court had previously proscribed and designated as a terrorist organisation.
But Ejimakor insisted the conviction had no grounding in evidence or logic.
“This is the only day I have witnessed a man being convicted for mere puffery — for what he said with his mouth, not what he did with his hands,” he said. “The verdict is not consistent with the evidence laid before the court. The sentence is overbroad, cruel, and unusual.”
He argued that no link had been established between Kanu’s broadcasts and any act of violence.
“How can you convict a man for making a broadcast from an unnamed location when he never tied that broadcast to any single incident — not even someone slapping another person, let alone terrorism?” he asked. “No evidence was laid. I do not know where this verdict can be grounded in law, logic, or fact.”
Accusing the court of capitulating to political considerations and ethnic prejudice, Ejimakor declared:
“The judgment is not based on law or facts. It is based on politics and tribal, primordial sentiments — simply because Mazi Nnamdi Kanu is Igbo. Today, we saw an Igbo man being trampled upon, and by God Almighty, we are not going to allow it.”
He vowed that the defense team would immediately head to the Court of Appeal, and, if necessary, pursue the matter up to the Supreme Court.
“By God Almighty, Mazi Nnamdi Kanu will not remain convicted. This judgment will be overturned,” he said.
Ejimakor maintained that self-determination is not a crime and warned that the ruling sets a dangerous precedent.
“Mazi Nnamdi Kanu is not a terrorist. He is a man pursuing change. To pursue a separate nation is not a crime. Yet in Nigeria today, it appears mere words now amount to terrorism,” he said.
The sentencing marks a new and contentious chapter in Kanu’s long-running legal and political battle — a saga that has sparked protests, security operations, and deep national debates since 2015. His legal team is expected to file a formal appeal in the coming days.
