The detained leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Nnamdi Kanu, has approached the Court of Appeal with a 22-ground challenge aimed at overturning the judgment of the Federal High Court in Abuja that sentenced him to life imprisonment on November 20, 2025.
In the notice of appeal, which he personally signed, Kanu faulted the ruling delivered by Justice James Omotosho, arguing that the trial court committed multiple errors of law that resulted in what he described as a serious miscarriage of justice.
Kanu was convicted on seven counts of terrorism brought against him by the Federal Government. In his first ground of appeal, he contended that the trial judge failed to properly address the impact of events that disrupted his original trial proceedings in 2017.
According to him, the judge erred in law “by failing to resolve the procedural and competence consequences of the foundational disruption of the original trial process in September 2017 (Operation Python Dance II), thereby occasioning a miscarriage of justice.”
Expanding on this claim, Kanu recounted that his residence in Afara-Ukwu was raided by Nigerian security forces during Operation Python Dance II in September 2017.
“The said operation resulted in deaths and destruction and triggered disruption of the earlier proceedings.
“The Appellant’s case thereafter proceeded in a manner that required the trial court to first determine the legal effect of that foundational disruption on competence.
“The trial court proceeded to take evidence and deliver judgment without first resolving the foundational competence implications arising from the said State action.
“The judgment of conviction was delivered on 20 November 2025 notwithstanding the unresolved foundational competence issues,” he added.
The IPOB leader further accused Justice Omotosho of neglecting to rule on his preliminary objection before continuing with the trial. He argued that the judge erred in law “by failing, refusing or neglecting to hear and determine the Appellant’s pending Preliminary Objection challenging the competence of the proceedings before proceeding to trial and judgment.”
Kanu explained that the objection, supported by affidavit evidence, raised fundamental jurisdictional issues that went to the heart of the trial’s validity.
“The Learned Trial Judge did not hear or determine the objection. The court proceeded with evidence and delivered judgment on 20 November 2025 while the objection remained pending and undetermined.”
In another ground of appeal, Kanu argued that the court went ahead to convict him while his bail application was still unresolved, a development he said undermined the fairness of the trial process.
He also challenged the sentencing phase, alleging that the court imposed punishment without allowing him to speak in mitigation and without weighing relevant factors. According to him, the trial judge erred in law by imposing sentence without taking the Appellant’s allocutus and by imposing excessive and/or unlawful sentences without considering relevant mitigation factors.
“Upon conviction, the Appellant was not afforded the opportunity to address the court in mitigation (allocutus).
“Sentence was imposed without allocutus. The court did not consider relevant mitigation or sentencing factors.”
In his prayers before the Court of Appeal, Kanu is seeking an order quashing his conviction on all counts in charge number FHC/ABJ/CR/383/2015, as well as an order setting aside the sentences imposed by the Federal High Court.
He further asked for “An Order of the Honourable Court of Appeal discharging and acquitting the Appellant in respect of all the counts in charge No.FHC/ABJ/CR/383/2015.”
Kanu also informed the appellate court of his intention to be physically present during the hearing of the appeal, indicating that he may personally conduct his case.
“I desire to put my case and argument into writing and also adopt my argument orally in the court on the hearing of the appeal,” he added.
, Nnamdi Kanu, has approached the Court of Appeal with a 22-ground challenge){kind=link}