By DAYO ADESULU
The detained leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Nnamdi Kanu, has formally approached the Court of Appeal, seeking to overturn his conviction and multiple prison sentences imposed by the Federal High Court in Abuja, describing the entire trial process as deeply flawed and unjust.
In a notice of appeal dated February 4, 2026, Kanu declared his intention to challenge both his conviction and the sentences handed down on November 20, 2025, insisting that the proceedings were riddled with fundamental legal defects that led to a miscarriage of justice.
Kanu Appeals Seven-Count Conviction, Life Sentences
According to the appeal document, Kanu is contesting his conviction on seven criminal counts, including terrorism-related offences, for which the trial court sentenced him to five life terms, alongside additional years of imprisonment.
“I, Nnamdi Kanu, the appellant, having been convicted and sentenced… do hereby give notice of appeal against my conviction,” the notice stated.
The IPOB leader was found guilty of offences such as committing acts preparatory to terrorism, making broadcasts allegedly intended to intimidate the public, and being the leader and member of IPOB, which remains a proscribed organisation under Nigerian law.
Court’s Judgment and Sentences Under Scrutiny
Justice James Omotosho of the Federal High Court, Abuja, delivered the judgment in November 2025, sentencing Kanu to:
-
Five life sentences for terrorism-related offences
-
20 years imprisonment for being the leader of a proscribed organisation
-
Five years imprisonment, without the option of fine, for importing a radio transmitter without a licence
Kanu’s legal team now argues that the severity of these sentences was compounded by what they describe as unresolved procedural irregularities that undermined the fairness of the trial.
2017 Military Operation Central to Appeal Argument
One of the central pillars of the Nnamdi Kanu appeal against conviction is the claim that the trial court failed to properly address the impact of the September 2017 military operation at Kanu’s Afara-Ukwu residence in Abia State.
Kanu argued that the operation fundamentally disrupted the original trial process and that the court erred by ignoring the legal consequences of that disruption.
“The Learned Trial Judge erred in law by failing to resolve the procedural and competence consequences of the foundational disruption of the original trial process,” the appeal stated.
Objections and Bail Application Allegedly Ignored
Kanu further contended that the Federal High Court proceeded to trial and delivered judgment while his preliminary objection remained unresolved.
According to the appeal document, the trial judge neither heard nor ruled on the objection challenging the competence of the proceedings before reaching a verdict.
In addition, Kanu faulted the court for delivering judgment while his bail application was still pending, arguing that this action compromised his constitutional right to a fair hearing.
Allegation of Conviction Under Repealed Law
Another major ground of appeal is Kanu’s claim that the trial court convicted him under a law that was no longer in force at the time of judgment.
He argued that Justice Omotosho relied on the Terrorism Prevention (Amendment) Act, 2013, despite its repeal by the Terrorism (Prevention and Prohibition) Act, 2022.
“The Learned Trial Judge erred in law by convicting and sentencing the Appellant under a repealed statute,” the appeal document stated.
Double Jeopardy and Fair Hearing Claims
Kanu also alleged that he was subjected to double jeopardy, contrary to Section 36(9) of the 1999 Constitution, by being retried on issues that had previously been nullified by the Court of Appeal.
Additionally, he claimed he was denied the right to a fair hearing after the court allegedly failed to allow him file or present a final written address before judgment was delivered.
Legal analysts note that if proven, such claims could significantly weaken the foundation of the conviction.
Reliefs Sought and Request to Appear in Court
Among the reliefs sought, Kanu urged the Court of Appeal to:
-
Allow the appeal in full
-
Quash his conviction and sentences
-
Discharge and acquit him on all counts
He also informed the appellate court of his desire to be physically present during the hearing, stating that he may choose to conduct the appeal in person.
Current Detention and Transfer Request Denied
Kanu remains in detention at a correctional facility in Sokoto State, following the court’s refusal to grant his request for transfer to a facility in either Niger or Nasarawa State.
His continued detention and the appeal process are expected to attract renewed attention from supporters, legal observers, and international human rights groups monitoring the case.
What the Appeal Means Going Forward
The Nnamdi Kanu appeal against conviction marks a critical phase in one of Nigeria’s most high-profile legal and political cases in recent years. While the Federal Government maintains that due process was followed, Kanu’s legal challenge raises questions about trial procedure, applicable laws, and constitutional safeguards.
As the Court of Appeal prepares to examine the case, the outcome could have far-reaching implications—not only for Kanu and IPOB, but also for Nigeria’s justice system and the handling of politically sensitive prosecutions.
#NnamdiKanu #IPOB #CourtOfAppeal #NigerianJudiciary #BreakingNews #LegalBattle #HumanRights #NigeriaNews
