The Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) has asked Justice James Omotosho of the Federal High Court, Abuja, to clarify the legal provisions used in his recent judgment against its leader, Nnamdi Kanu.
In a statement issued on Friday by its spokesperson, Emma Powerful, the group said it intends to scrutinise the ruling and highlight what it considers constitutional issues. IPOB claimed no weapons or attack materials were tendered in court and argued that no witness testified to any offence committed by Kanu under Nigerian or international law.
The group maintained that calls for self-determination fall under internationally recognised rights, citing the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights and UN covenants on civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights. It insisted that political agitation or demands for a referendum do not amount to a criminal act.
IPOB also noted that Kanu has remained in detention throughout recent security incidents in the South-East, and urged the court to consider this when assessing his involvement. It referenced Section 36(12) of the 1999 Constitution, which states that no one can be convicted of an offence not clearly defined in written law, and asked the judge to specify the exact law relied upon in delivering the verdict.
The group said it will continue reviewing the judgment and raising what it considers constitutional and procedural questions, adding that the case carries implications for human rights and judicial standards. IPOB reaffirmed its commitment to peaceful advocacy and said it will keep engaging international bodies through diplomatic and lawful channels.
